John, Has anyone at UUNET given an opinion on the validity or licensing of this patent relative to the IPsec committee? Paul -------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Lambert Director of Security Products Oracle Corporation Phone: (415) 506-0370 500 Oracle Parkway, Box 659410 Fax: (415) 413-2963 Redwood Shores, CA 94065 palamber@us.oracle.com --------------------------------------------------------------
-- BEGIN included message
- To: PALAMBER@us.oracle.com
- Subject: Re: Network Layer Encryption History and Prior Art
- From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>
- Date: 18 Jun 96 22:24:18
- Cc: ipsec@tis.com,JHAVERTY@us.oracle.com,gnu@toad.com
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
-- END included message