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

Re: Auto-forward: Re: Network Layer Encryption History and Prior Art



Actually, it started even before that.  The PLI (Private Line Interface),
documented as an appendix in BBN Report 1822 (How to Connect a Host to an
IMP), was the predecessor to the IPLI (which was the version that had to
work on the Internet with TCP/IP as it evolved from the Arpanet with the
original NCP protocol).

/Jack

>Date: 18 Jun 96 19:24:34
>From:"Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>
>To: PALAMBER@us.oracle.com
>Subject: Re: Network Layer Encryption History and Prior Art
>Cc: ipsec@TIS.COM,JHAVERTY@us.oracle.com,gnu@toad.com
>X-Orcl-Application: In-Reply-To:  PALAMBER.US.ORACLE.COM's message of 18
Jun 96 18:11:26 -0700,
>X-Orcl-Application: In-Reply-To:
<199606190152.SAA01090@mailsun2.us.oracle.com>
>X-Orcl-Application: Address:  1 Amherst St., Cambridge, MA 02139
>X-Orcl-Application: Phone:  (617) 253-8091
>
>
>   Date: 18 Jun 96 18:11:26 -0700
>   From: "PALAMBER.US.ORACLE.COM" <PALAMBER@us.oracle.com>
>
>   The research and development of "Network Security" started in the
>   late 70's at BBN with the development of the "IPLI".  Classified
>   research and development continued in this area on the Blacker
>   (Unisys) and Caneware (Motorola) programs in the early 80's.  The NSA
>   sponsored Secure Data Network System (SDNS) project brought together
>   a variety of vendors that created the early SP3, KMP and MSP
>   specifications.  SP3 provided network layer security services that
>   included a tunneling mode.  SP3 is very similar to the IPsec working
>   group ESP specification.  The Key Management Protocol (KMP) is
>   similar to the ISAKMP specification in concept, but used ASN.1 for
>   specifying the protocol formats.  Much of the SDNS work was openly
>   published starting in about 1988.  The Motorola Network Encryption
>   System (NES) is an SDNS device and was designed in the mid to late
>   80's.
>
>Paul, thanks for the history lesson!!
>
>John (Gilmore), is this what you were looking for in terms of real Prior
>Art to take to Rick Adams, so he'll drop the patent claims?  The SP3
>specifications should hopefully be detailed enough to satisfy a Patent
>Attorney as being Real Prior Art in the Patent Context.  The only
>question is whether or not there's enough there to take out all of the
>claims in UUNET's patent (or at least enough so that IPSEC won't be have
>to worry about infringing the UUNET patent.)
>
>						- Ted
>
>

Jack Haverty
Internet Products Group
Oracle Corporation
jhaverty@oracle1.xo.com
415-506-2942