[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Another Rambus, Re: Motion to abandon Sender ID

To: "'Gordon Fecyk'" <gordonf@xxxxxxxxx>, IETF MARID WG <ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Another Rambus, Re: Motion to abandon Sender ID
From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 09:13:57 -0700
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/mail-archive/>
List-id: <ietf-mxcomp.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-mxcomp-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
Sender: owner-ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxxxxxxx


> I see another Rambus in the making here, exactly the same 
> concern I brought
> up with the BOF chairs back at IETF 59, where I was assured 
> the IETF didn't
> tolerate such behaviour.

The allegations in the Rambus case were that Rambus had not
revealed their patent application to the committee and had
participated in WG discussions on the spec.

That is not the case here.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Another Rambus, Re: Motion to abandon Sender ID
  - From: Yakov Shafranovich

Prev by Date: Re: Motion to abandon Sender ID
Next by Date: Re: Motion to abandon Sender ID
Previous by thread: The SSL license offer.
Next by thread: Re: Another Rambus, Re: Motion to abandon Sender ID
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread