Pascal Thubert \(pthubert\) via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
> I'm personally fond of the IP-in-IP variation that filed in 20+ years
> ago as US patent 7,356,031.
No wonder -- you are listed as the co-inventor!
Just the fact that it is patented (and the patent is still unexpired)
would make it a disfavored candidate for an Internet transition technology.
It was not nice of y'all to try to get a monopoly over nesting headers
for making an overlay network that tunnels things to distant routers.
You have to certify that your work is original in order to even apply
for a patent. So, nobody had ever thought of that before y'all did? Really?
John
