This effort is very commendable and addresses this specific issue but not the policy that is the root cause of the problem. While this is a clear statement from Entrust that they want to play by the verbally agreed rules it does not inhibit or eliminate the potential problem. If the IETF is to continue being what it has been, that is a standards agency that promotes leading edge-rather vision than lagging-edge implementations and PKIX in particular), like some of the other major standards bodies, this issue of IP management needs to be addressed. The IETF (Through the Poised WG) needs to have a specific and exact policy for dealing with IP issues, a policy that is much less ambiguous to current IP laws and Processes. It, this updated policy, needs to be publicly stated and agreed upon by all developers submitting to the IETF for comments or standardization. I would actually suggest that the submitters of drafts, rfc's or standards proposals, by submitting them convey a limited power of attorney in the matter of the technology and maybe we create a new class of standards to appease the corporate "parents". I personally believe that this arms-distance approach is necessary to further cement and solidify the ISOC's position through the efforts of its disconnected children, the IESG and its IETF. IMHO - A statement from the IETF regarding its vision and the need for a policy like this to indemnify the ISOC/IESG/IETF itself are very much in order Todd -----Original Message----- From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm-sec@htt-consult.com> To: Warwick Ford <wford@verisign.com>; Tim Polk <wpolk@nist.gov>; ietf-pkix@imc.org <ietf-pkix@imc.org>; Stephen Samson <stephen.samson@entrust.com> Date: Thursday, April 23, 1998 11:04 AM Subject: Re: Entrust Technologies Announces Royalty-free License for CRL Distribution Points Patent >At 01:04 PM 4/23/98 -0700, Warwick Ford wrote: > >I spoke with John Ryan about this directly yesterday. I don't think we >will need much to get the exact wording of terms out. I am right now >testing out a few IPsec products that specifically care about this, so stay >tuned... > >>I also am very pleased to see this move by Entrust. When can we see the >>full statement of licensing terms? Royalty-free is good, but we need to be >>sure that there are no other problematic terms or conditions associated >>with the license. >> >>Assuming that turns out all clear, then the profile can certainly proceed >>immediately to Proposed Standard with CDPs and the other extensions and >>policy qualifiers reinstated. >> >>We would also like to continue study of OpenCDP on the ietf-pkix list -- >>there are some features here that look very valuable and that we may want >>to include in a follow-up standard. >> >>Warwick >> >> >>At 11:57 AM 4/23/98 -0400, Tim Polk wrote: >>> >>>I was delighted to see Steve's email. Perhaps we can put patents and >>>politics behind us and move on to building and deploying security >>>solutions. In that light: >>> >>>At the LA meeting, I proposed to remove two certificate extensions (crl >>>distribution points and authority info access) and two crl extensions >>>(issuing distribution point and certificate issuer) from the profile >>>forwarded to the IESG. This decision was based entirely on IP issues, not >>>technical merit. As the patent encumbrances have been removed, I now >>>intend to leave these extensions in the specification. >>> >>>Thanks, >>> >>>Tim Polk >>> >>>At 11:28 AM 4/23/98 -0400, you wrote: >>>>Members of the IETF community; >>>> >>>>In response to your concerns, Entrust Technologies is pleased to announce >>>>that rights in its US Patent 5,699,431 will be licensed on a royalty-free >>>>basis. The entire announcement can be found on the Entrust Technologies >>>>website, by following the attached link: >>>> >>>>http://www.entrust.com/news/1998/04_23_98.htm >>>> >>>>For more information, contact >>>> >>>>Steve Samson >>>> >>>>Entrust Technologies Inc. >>>>750 Heron Rd., 8th Floor >>>>Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1V 1A7 >>>> >>>>voice: 613-247-3725 >>>>fax: 613-247-3412 >>>>email: steve.samson@entrust.com >>>>Entrust Validation String: SCKM-HQDL-X75G >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>Warwick Ford, VeriSign, Inc., Tel (781)2456996 x225; Fax (781)2456006 >>wford@verisign.com; 301 Edgewater Pl, Suite 210, Wakefield, MA 01880 >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >Robert Moskowitz >ICSA >Security Interest EMail: rgm-sec@htt-consult.com >
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: application/pkcs7-signature