Re[2]: IETF process (was How many 2.6 users?)

["Chris Bartram" <RCB@xxxxxx>]

 In <34610813.7EB29377@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> IANG@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:

[snip]

> >    So the existence of patented technology (such as RSA or IDEA) would
> > seem to be not necessarily a problem, as long as the patent is licensed
> > under appropriately "open" terms.

[snip]

> > Whether RSA meets this standard is open
> > to question - certainly they have been accused by their detractors of
> > non-openness in their licensing process.

[snip]

> I would think that having the RSA algorithm listed in the standard,
> along with an IESG comment that said that this algorithm may not be
> available under open, non-discriminatory and reasonable guidelines to
> all parties would be quite a useful bargaining point.
>
> We could go even further.  You could say that the RSA algorithm is to be
> used, except where algorithm is not available under open,
> non-discriminatory and reasonable guidelines.  If we need a definition
> of this, I would suggest

[snip]

> All of which seems obvious of course, based on the snippet above.  Are
> there any counter-views?

As someone that develops for a platform not officially "blessed" by RSA, I
would strongly object to RSA technology being referenced in an encryption
standard. We have approached RSA multiple times, and cannot even *get* a
license for their technology (even if we volunteer to port it ourselves)
at any cost. We dropped out of monitoring the S/MIME standards a while back
when it looked like it was going to require RSA technology-- so we took up
monitoring OpenPGP as an alternative. We develop an e-mail system for HP3000
computers and fully intend to implement and support OpenPGP on this platform.

Recommendation (or requirement) of a technology not available to *all*
implementors should not be allowed in an IETF standard.

Note; pgp and the rsalib code *do* work fine on our platform [hp 3000
computers running the MPE/iX OS] but we still cannot get a license for the
technology to "legally" use it. Not very *open*.

                -Chris Bartram
                 3k Associates, Inc.


______________________/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_
  Chris Bartram        Sales (US):   800 Net-Mail    Fax:+1 703 451-3720
   ______                         +1 703 569-9189    mailto:sales@xxxxxx
  /__ |  \__________   Sales (Europe):+44(1480)414131 Fax:+44(1480)414134
 /  / | / ________     Sales (Pacific):+61 3 9489 8216 Fax:+61 3 9482 5124
|  /_ |<  ______       Tech Support:+1 703 569-9189  Fax:+1 703 451-3720
 \ __)| \ ___          mailto:support at 3k.com       Me: rcb at 3k.com
  \______/Associates,  6901 Old Keene Mill Rd Suite 500 Springfield VA 22150
_________________Inc._/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_
Gopher: gopher.3k.com   Anon-FTP: ftp.3k.com  WWW: http://www.3k.com/