nanog mailing list archives
Re: US patent 5473599
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 19:33:45 -0700
On May 7, 2014, at 4:19 PM, Matt Palmer <mpalmer () hezmatt org> wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:57:01PM -0400, David Conrad wrote:However, assume that the OpenBSD developers did document their protocol and requested an IESG action and was refused. Do you believe that would justify squatting on an already assigned number?I'm going to go with "yes", just to be contrary. At the point that the IESG refused to deal with 'em, they've effectively been ostracised from "the Internet community", and thus they are under no obligation to act within the rules and customs of that community. - Matt
I don’t believe for one second that the IESG refused to deal with ‘em. I do believe the IESG did not hand them everything they wanted on a silver platter in contravention of the established consensus process and that they failed to gain the consensus they wanted as easily as they hoped. I’d say they are not, in fact ostracized or even disenfranchised and that their abrogation of their obligations to act within the rules and customs of the internet community in developing network protocols for IP is more like a temper tantrum than a legitimate grievance. Owen
Current thread:
- RE: US patent 5473599, (continued)
- RE: US patent 5473599 Leo Vegoda (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 David Conrad (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Matt Palmer (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Rob Seastrom (May 07)
- Please moderate yourselves, was: Re: US patent 5473599 joel jaeggli (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Robert Drake (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Owen DeLong (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Henning Brauer (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Job Snijders (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Henning Brauer (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Owen DeLong (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Matt Palmer (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Henning Brauer (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Bill Fenner (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Henning Brauer (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Randy Bush (May 08)
- Re: US patent 5473599 sthaug (May 06)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Eygene Ryabinkin (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Rob Seastrom (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Gary Buhrmaster (May 07)
- Re: US patent 5473599 Henning Brauer (May 08)