Re: IPR Disclosure: The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-nsis-tunnel-13

Hi Jukka,

On 06.12.2010 20:32, Jukka Manner wrote:
> Hi Roland, thanks for your detailed analysis. You are right that the QoS
> NSLP would not necessarily included the binding concept had we known
> Columbia had a hidden IPR on it. So, essentially the IPR also affects
> the QoS NSLP. And the issue with RFC 2764 is pretty good, actually -
> interesting how the same stuff gets patented years after publishing it
> the first time. ;)

Not quite. AFAIK it is a patent _application_, but not a valid patent
yet. IMHO, RFC 2746 is a very close match and thus the patent should
not be granted w.r.t. most of its claims.

Regards,
 Roland