[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Nortel Networks Statement on IPR claimed in draft-ietf-ccamp-loose-path-reopt-00.txt

Hi,

First of all, thanks to the CCAMP WG chair for helping out in the resolution of this issue.

The draft represents an important technique which, in our opinion, is a valuable addition to the management and operation of LSPs in MPLS and GMPLS networks especially where those LSPs traverse multiple domains. We have looked at this function carefully, but do not believe that it can be achieved by any other technique that would not also be potentially covered by this IPR disclosure. Therefore we propose the following steps:

1. Text is added to the I-D as follows.

The procedures described in this document are the subject of an Intellectual Property Rights claim. For this reason, the procedures are entirely optional within an MPLS or GMPLS network. Implementations that do not support the procedures described in this document will interoperate seamlessly with those that do.
Further, an implementation that does not support the procedures described in this document will not be impacted or implicated by a neighboring implementation that does implement the procedures.

An ingress implementation that chooses not to support the procedures described in this document may still achieve re-optimization by periodically issuing a speculative make-before-break replacement of an LSP without trying to discovery whether a more optimal path is available in a downstream domain. Such a procedure would not be in conflict with any mechanisms not already documented in [RFC3209] and [RFC3473].

2. The I-D should be updated with comments arising from the WG last call.

3. The I-D should be progressed as an informational RFC

Thanks.

JP.

On Apr 7, 2005, at 8:52 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote:

Please see below a response from the Counsel for Nortel Networks with
regard to my enquiry about their IPR disclosure for
draft-ietf-ccamp-loose-path-reopt-00.txt.

The working group must now decide whether it wishes to pursue the
techniques described in the I-D notwithstanding the IPR claim, or whether
it should seek out an alternative technology.

Discussion please.

Thanks,
Adrian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michelle Lee" <mleelaw@nortel.com>
To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: "'Kireeti Kompella'" <kireeti@juniper.net>; "Richard Weiss"
<weissr@nortel.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 5:54 PM
Subject: RE: Nortel Networks Statement on IPR claimed in
draft-ietf-ccamp-loose-path-reopt-00.txt


Dear Mr. Farrel,

Thank you for your email.

Unfortunately, I am not in a position to answer these questions
specifically, especially since they would require my providing
privileged
and/or confidential information. We believe, however, our intentions are
clearly set forth in and by our conforming disclosure and declaration
statement to IETF with respect to IETF Internet Draft
draft-ietf-ccamp-loose-path-reopt-00.txt, and that experts in the area
can 
probably better determine relevance of the identified patent therein.

Kind Regards,
Michelle Lee
Counsel, IP Law
Nortel Networks


 -----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 4:32 PM
To: weissr@nortelnetworks.com; mleelaw@nortelnetworks.com
Cc: 'Kireeti Kompella'; ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Nortel Networks Statement on IPR claimed in
draft-ietf-ccamp-loose-path-reopt-00.txt



Dear Richard and Michelle,

Thank you for submitting your Patent Disclosure
(

<http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/nortel-ipr-draft-ietf-ccamp-loose-path- reopt
-0 
0.txt>

http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/nortel-ipr-draft-ietf-ccamp-loose-path- reopt-00 
.txt)
with respect to IETF Internet Draft
draft-ietf-ccamp-loose-path-reopt-00.txt.

I would be grateful if you could clarify two points to help me
understand 
this discolsure further.

1. The disclosure states that:
     Nortel Networks U.S. Patent No. 6,560,654 entitled "Apparatus and
     method of maintaining timely topology data within a link state
routing
network" may contain claims that may be necessary for practicing a
resulting IETF Standard based on this Internet Draft.
Could you provide more detail about what aspects of
draft-ietf-ccamp-loose-path-reopt-00.txt you believe may be impacted
by 
  this disclosure?

2. Can you clarify whether the "fair, reasonable, reciprocal, and
non-discriminatory terms" referenced in the disclosure include the
intention, in the event that the referenced draft becomes an Internet
Standard, not to assert the patent except that some party asserts a
patent
patent it owns or controls against Nortel?
By way of an example of wording that covers this intention, can I
draw 
   your attention to a completely unrelated IPR disclosure at

<http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/cisco-ipr-draft-ietf-tcpm-tcpsecure.txt> 
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/cisco-ipr-draft-ietf-tcpm-tcpsecure.txt

Thank you for any clarification you are able to offer.

Please note that I am copying this email to Kireeti Kompella who
co-chairs
the IETF's CCAMP working group with me. The CCAMP working group
developed
the Internet-Draft in question
(draft-ietf-ccamp-loose-path-reopt-00.txt) 
and so I am also copying this email to the CCAMP mailing list.

Best regards,
Adrian Farrel
--
Adrian Farrel
Old Dog Consulting
Phone: +44 (0) 1978-860944
Fax: +44 (0) 870-130-5411
adrian@olddog.co.uk <mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk>