Dean Anderson wrote: > I think you misunderstand how patents work or what the license says. > > The licence is available for the case "when used with either ...". It is > not the case that a patent only applies to specific RFCs. RFC's aren't > mentioned in patents. Patent claims covering tls-extractor very likely* > apply to any use of extractor, not just those uses that also use other > Certicom technology in other RFCs. I think you are assuming that > because Certicom offers a license for a certain situation (or maybe 'use > configuration' is a better phrase), that different use configurations > then won't need a license, but that isn't usually* the case. Those other > 'use configurations' that infringe a claim still require a license. After this clarification I would object draft-ietf-tls-extractor to be published as proposed standard. regards, Nikos _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf