Re: IPR (Was: Re: Comments on draft-bagnulo-multi6dt-hba-00.txt)

El 18/11/2004, a las 16:50, Francis Dupont escribió:

>  In your previous mail you wrote:
>
>    On 15-nov-04, at 16:50, Jari Arkko wrote:
>
>>> PS: BTW CGA IPR holders provide royalty-free licenses only for SEND,
>>> can they update their IPR texts on the IETF web for HBAs too?
>
>> FYI: I have asked the Ericsson IPR department to inform the
>> IETF about their licensing conditions regarding the HBA draft
>> and usage in MULTI6.
>
>    Shouldn't we try to determine whether the patent even applies in the
>    first place?
>
> => as the HBA idea is an extension of the CGA one,

I disagree

The HBA uses the format of CGA in order to provide simoultaneous 
support of SeND and CGA
We could prefectly define HBA with a different format, so that it is 
not extension of CGA (this would cause problems when using multi6 and 
send of course, which is bad)

But the point is that HBA are defined as a CGA extension just to allow 
Send and multi6 run together

regards, marcelo


> I can't see how the
> patent can apply to CGA but not to HBA... No, the problem is real,
> but it should very easy to fix with a better wording in the IPR note.
>
> Thanks
>
> [email protected]
>
>
------------------------------------------
Please note that my former email address
[email protected] is no longer in use
Please send mail to:
marcelo at it dot uc3m dot es
------------------------------------------