Mr Story:
Thanks for looking into this. See my technical comment/question below:
Robert Story wrote:
[...]
I think this is exactly the sort of thing the IPR RFC requires for
accepting encumbered ideas. (Although the restriction to root zone
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
operators is a bit troubling.)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
To reassure you, the patent application claims neither validating
resolver process not validating resolver software media nor validating
resolver system. If it were doing any of this, the spirit of the
pre-announced IPR disclosure is to make resolver "free license" for
DNSSEC root priming purposes, so the IPR wording would be adjusted
accordingly.
Do you see the priming draft scope to cover anything beyond priming the
DNS root? I didn't read anything in this direction.
Regards,
--
- Thierry Moreau
CONNOTECH Experts-conseils inc.
9130 Place de Montgolfier
Montreal, Qc
Canada H2M 2A1
Tel.: (514)385-5691
Fax: (514)385-5900
web site: http://www.connotech.com
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
