On 6/12/06, coderman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
perhaps i'm missing something, but if this patent is valid (which i'd bet almost any amount of money it is not) than a lot more than just DHT's anc CAN's are affected, aren't they? this is "calling a datum by its digest", or self certifying identifier, and is enmeshed in more secure protocols and systems than i can count. how is this even novel? ... i must be missing something.
I'm no patent lawyer, but as far as I can tell, you are absolutely right. They make some claims that are outright false (again, in my estimation) in the patent itself, for example, "In prior art systems for identifying data items there is no direct relationship between the data names and the data item. The same data name in two different contexts may refer to different data items, and two different data names in the same context may refer to the same data item." The earlier thread in p2p-hackers provides evidence that this was done at least as early as 1995. Alen _______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list p2p-hackers@zgp.org http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers _______________________________________________ Here is a web page listing P2P Conferences: http://www.neurogrid.net/twiki/bin/view/Main/PeerToPeerConferences
