Re: IPR Disclosure CERTICOM CORP's Statement about IPR related to RFC 3279 and RFC 3280

"A method of Verifying a pair of correspondents in electronic
transaction, the correspondents each including first and sec
ond signature schemes and wherein the first signature scheme
is computationally more difficult in signing than Verifying
and the second signature scheme is computationally more
difficult in verifying than signing."

The CMU system did that back in 1995. They used DSA and RSA for the
performance advantage on the server.

It seems pretty irrelevant at this point as we are using ECDH for both at
this point.



On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 8:55 PM Andrea Caccia <[email protected]>
wrote:

> The patent should be the attached one and it mentions RFC 3279 and RFC
> 3280 as "cited by examiner".
> Does this mean that "the patent(s) or patent application(s) disclosed
> above that would necessarily be infringed by implementation of the
> technology required by the relevant IETF specification" that are already
> were published when the patent was examined, in fact also mentioned in the
> patent itself?
>
> I'm not a lawyer but this makes no sense to me.
>
> Andrea
>
> @Peter: sorry if you received twice the message, I used a wrong account to
> send the previous one
>
>
> > Il giorno 4 ott 2019, alle ore 01:10, Peter Gutmann <
> [email protected]> ha scritto:
> >
> > IETF Secretariat <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >> An IPR disclosure that pertains to your RFC entitled "Algorithms and
> >> Identifiers for the Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure
> Certificate and
> >> Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile" (RFC3279) was submitted to
> the
> >> IETF Secretariat on  and has been posted on the "IETF Page of
> Intellectual
> >> Property Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3798/).
> The
> >> title of the IPR disclosure is "CERTICOM CORP's Statement about IPR
> related
> >> to RFC 3279 and RFC 3280"
> >
> > Could someone, maybe an IP lawyer, have a look at this and try and
> figure out
> > what, if anything, it has to do with 3280, and more importantly 2459
> which
> > predates the patent by a decade?
> >
> > Peter.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > pkix mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix
>
> _______________________________________________
> pkix mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix
>

_______________________________________________
pkix mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix