Re: SRP in OpenSSH draft protocol spec

[RJ Atkinson <rja%inet.org@localhost>]

At 19:33 02/04/01, Tom Wu wrote:
>Do you have the same concerns with CAST:
>
>http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/CAST-128-entrust
>http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2144.txt
>
>If so, your contention should be with RFC2026. 

        Not at all.  RFC-2026 describes the outer limits
that process rules permit, not IETF day to day practices.

        In particular, you have noted that Stanford holds 
the patent on SRP, so you aren't the patent holder yourself.
Entrust is in fact the patent holder for CAST.

        For the record, I object to the IETF SSH WG including
any technology in its specifications that is patented and 
for which a royalty-free, hassle-free, authorised licence 
statement from the patent holder has not been published 
in an RFC or is available from the IETF Secretariat.  
If each user needs to negotiate with the patent holder, 
then it is not acceptable.

Yours,

Ran
rja%inet.org@localhost