Mukund, While I agree with you, Joel has the right guidance on this; but also knowing the authors fairly well, I feel they would not send us down a road that will box the work into a corner.
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Mukund Sivaraman <m...@isc.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 09:47:41AM -0800, joel jaeggli wrote: > > On 1/6/17 9:25 AM, Mukund Sivaraman wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 01:48:59AM +0000, Warren Kumari wrote: > > >>> (2) In a feature implemented for Unbound: > > >>> > > >>> - Unbound first checks cache > > >>> > > >>> - If a stale answer is found, its TTL is set to 0, and the cache > entry > > >>> is served > > >>> > > >>> - If a stale answer is found, Unbound starts something similar to > > >>> prefetch/HAMMER. > > >>> > > >>>> NOTE: I believe that there may be (non-Google) IP associated with > > >>>> this. A lawyer will be filing the IPR disclosure later today (time > > >>>> zone differences, etc). > > >>> The two approaches are somewhat different, and so at least one of > them > > >>> may not be covered by this patent. > > >>> > > >> Yup. The IPR disclose was about IPR belonging to Xerocole. Xerocole > was > > >> acquired by Akamai in March 2015. I believe that David will discuss > the IPR > > >> with his employer. > > > Please explore if this patent can be circumvented without affecting the > > > goal of the draft, so that it does not apply. It would be better than > > > licensing it under some legal terms. > > IMHO this can be better expressed as a preference for unencumbered > > technology. > > > > the working group should not as far as I am concerned get buried in how > > precisely to achieve that. > > There's nothing wrong in exploring unencumbered technology. It isn't too > much of a diversion to check if the patent can be avoided. > > IETF has had several drafts that avoid patented methods by documenting > something else (compress vs. deflate/gzip, gif vs png, MPEG video vs > vpx, MPEG audio vs vorbis, opus, etc.) that usually turned out to be > better. > > One of the authors of this draft works at the company that owns the > patent. As he is introducing this draft and implementations such as mine > are concerned about the use of this patent, it would be good to attempt > to discover if the patented method can be avoided. > > Mukund > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
