The claims are broad, not specific to one field of use. But there isn't a patent yet and they may have been waiting to file after grant.
It is possible for someone other than the IPR holder to file but best if its the IPR holder. The mere existence of a patent does not necessarily mean an intention to enforce. On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Stephen Farrell <[email protected] > wrote: > > > On 25/10/14 15:56, Ted Lemon wrote: > > And also if anyone from Verisign is participating, they are required to > disclose, > > Well, only if they think that the IPR is relevant. Their claims > (I've not read 'em) could after all be unrelated to the draft, > e.g. if they've only claimed some madly complicated way of getting > the same effect as just leaving stuff out (which no doubt the > USPTO might still, in their infinite wisdom, consider patentable;-). > > S. > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
