US patent 5473599

Nick Hilliard nick at
Tue Apr 22 12:10:23 UTC 2014

On 22/04/2014 12:31, Henning Brauer wrote:
> it does NOT cover carp, not at all.

that is a political statement rather than a legal opinion.  If you read the
patent, it's pretty obvious that when you have a group of carp-enabled
devices providing a stable gateway IP address, and these devices are
routing traffic received via the carp published address, this configuration
provides the same functionality that's described in the patent claims.
This hasn't been tested in court and neither of us is a lawyer and the
patent seems to have expired, so it's academic at this stage.


More information about the NANOG mailing list