Hi Warren, I am one of the contributing authors in this document. I sincerely apologise for submitting a document which seemed to evoke passion in OpsAWG ;-)
As you can tell from my email address, I work for Cisco, which provided some input in taking the original TACACS and evolving it to TACACS+ in 1990s. I have double checked with IPR expert (a lawyer) in Cisco and he sees no IPR issues, and with our IETF experts who know of no IPR which impact TACACS+ in our pursuit of getting TACACS+ ratified as a standard, if that is what OpsAWG elects to do. I can work offline to make sure that we get the proper wording, but to the absolute best of my knowledge, Cisco has no IPR that applies to the document. Just to say, this process came about from engineers who are very interested in TACACS+ and its adoption and deployment, one of whom (me) works for Cisco. We want to address the crypto issue it has, and clean up the document, try to remove ambiguities, and deprecate some really insecure features. But also want to remove the perception that TACACS+ is a proprietary Cisco protocol. We thought that working with IETF to standardise the protocol may help all that, and get some interesting technical criticism. Many thanks and Best Regards, Doug, (Collaborating with: Thorsten, Andrej). On 15/02/2016 18:46, "OPSAWG on behalf of [email protected]" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >Send OPSAWG mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > >You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of OPSAWG digest..." > > >Today's Topics: > > 1. Untangling - Explicit call for IPR on > draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-00 (Warren Kumari) > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Message: 1 >Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 18:46:37 +0000 >From: Warren Kumari <[email protected]> >To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >Subject: [OPSAWG] Untangling - Explicit call for IPR on > draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-00 >Message-ID: > <cahw9_ikr4nfwbppqsntpfstuwer3cjrl+sfto2ojb3dkfni...@mail.gmail.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >Dear WG, > >Thanks to everyone who has been participating. It is refreshing to see >this >much passion and involvement in OpsAWG! We wanted to give this a bit of >time to settle down, and also to see where this ended up. > >We are going to do a series of steps to get as clear a view of the >consensus of the WG about this document. This message is a explicit call >for any known IPR. > >We will follow up with two other messages, each with a particular >question >- the reason for such formality is to try to untangle the many threads >that >erupted on the main list. > >Many of you have already expressed your opinion but can you please do so >again in response to the forthcoming two messages so that the record is >clear. We expect to determine the path forward in 2 weeks. > >Are you personally aware of any IPR that applies to >draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs? If so, has this IPR been disclosed in >compliance >with IETF IPR rules? >(See RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669, and 5378 for more details.) > >If you are a document author or listed contributor on this document, >please >reply to this email regardless of whether or not you are personally aware >of any relevant IPR. > >Scott, Tianran and Warren >-------------- next part -------------- >An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >URL: ><https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/attachments/20160215/7c6b >0802/attachment.html> > >------------------------------ > >Subject: Digest Footer > >_______________________________________________ >OPSAWG mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > > >------------------------------ > >End of OPSAWG Digest, Vol 105, Issue 119 >**************************************** _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
