optics pricing (Re: Weird GigE Media Converter Behavior)
Mark Borchers
mborchers at igillc.com
Mon Aug 30 17:50:32 UTC 2004
Peter Galbavy wrote:
>
> On the other hand, the use of patent licenses (like those
> that say "free if
> you don't claim against us") for things like VRRP do worry me.
>
Everybody's entitled to their opinion, but this excerpt from
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR//VRRP-CISCO does not seem to me
to portend predatory pricing:
/qw
Cisco believes that implementation of draft-ietf-vrrp-spec-05.txt will
require a license to Cisco's patent #5,473,599. If this protocol is
approved as an IETF standard, licenses will be available to any party on
reasonable, nondiscriminatory terms for implentation of the protocol.
On March 20, 1998, the definitive statement from Cisco Systems was
received:
From: Martin McNealis <mmcnealis at cisco.com>
The following statement is in response to recent requests for a
clarification on Cisco Systems' position regarding both its Hot
Standby Router Protocol (HSRP) and the Virtual Router Redundancy
Protocol (VRRP) proposal:-
In Cisco's assessment, the VRRP proposal does not represent
any significantly different functionality from that available
with HSRP and also implementation of 'draft-ietf-vrrp-spec-06.txt'
would likely infringe on Cisco's patent #5,473,599.
When Cisco originally learned of the VRRP proposal, the Hot
Standby Router Protocol was then promptly offered for
standardization with the understanding that, if approved,
licenses for HSRP would be made available on reasonable,
nondiscriminatory terms for implementation of the protocol.
This offer stands for the adoption and implementation of
HSRP.
However, now that the 'draft-li-hsrp-01.txt' submission is
approaching expiration and the Working Group is continuing with
the VRRP proposal, Cisco Systems reserves the right to protect
its intellectual property. Furthermore, Cisco takes the position
that standardizing on another proposal that so closely mirrors
an existing, well established, extensively deployed protocol
is out of step with the principles and practices embodied in the
IETF and would thus represent cause for concern within the
industry.
/qw
More information about the NANOG
mailing list