Return to ABOUTCISCOPATENT CVS log

Up to [ELWIX - Embedded LightWeight unIX -] / embedaddon / freevrrpd

freevrrpd 1.1

If you think that freevrrpd is not legal then read this mail/reply:

by lsh131.siteprotect.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id hAOJwhD18461
	for <m.hertrick@neovera.com>; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:58:43 -0600
  by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 24 Nov 2003 12:00:05 +0000
	by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id hAOJwdrX026823;
	Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:58:39 -0800 (PST)
Reply-To: <rbarr@cisco.com>
From: "Robert Barr " <rbarr@cisco.com>
To: "'Michael Hertrick'" <m.hertrick@neovera.com>
Subject: RE: RFC 2338 (VRRP) and US patent #5,473,599
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:58:39 -0800
Message-ID: <009401c3b2c5$5ae64e10$6601a8c0@amer.cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <3FBED170.4030604@neovera.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Mr Hertrick:

The following is Cisco's policy with respect to VRRP:


Cisco will not assert any patents owned or controlled by Cisco  against any
party  for making, using, selling, importing or offering for sale a product
that implements IETF RFC 2338, provided, however that:

Cisco retains the right to assert its patents  (including the right to claim
past royalties) against any party that asserts a patent it owns or controls
(either directly or indirectly) against Cisco or any of Cisco's affiliates
or successors in title; and Cisco retains the right to assert its patents
against any product or portion
thereof that is not necessary for compliance with RFC 2338.

If you have any questions, or if you would prefer a royalty-bearing license,
please contact me.

Robert Barr
VP, Intellectual Property
Worldwide Patent Counsel
Cisco Systems
408-525-9706

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Hertrick [mailto:m.hertrick@neovera.com] 
> Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 7:01 PM
> To: rbarr@cisco.com
> Subject: RFC 2338 (VRRP) and US patent #5,473,599
> 
> 
> Mr. Barr,
> 
> What does Cisco ask in return for a license to write and use a VRRP 
> implementation in accordance with RFC 2338?
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Michael Hertrick
> 571-437-5911
> Neovera, Inc.
> 
> 

I've send a new request from me to robert barr, freevrrpd is completly legal and agree with standards. So making, using, selling, importing or offering for sale is authorized.

Return-Path: <cyrus@smtp0.selectbourse.net>
Received: from smtp0.selectbourse.net ([unix socket])
 by smtp0.selectbourse.net (Cyrus v2.0.17); Fri, 05 Mar 2004 20:57:05 +0100
X-Sieve: cmu-sieve 2.0
Return-Path: <rbarr@cisco.com>
Received: from polux.bsdfr.org (polux.bsdfr.org [80.65.231.210])
 by smtp0.selectbourse.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2873D2EAE2
 for <spe@bsdshell.net>; Fri,  5 Mar 2004 20:57:05 +0100 (CET)
Received: from sj-iport-3.cisco.com (sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com
[171.71.176.72])
 by polux.bsdfr.org (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i25KA4GC091856
 for <spe@bsdfr.org>; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 21:10:05 +0100 (CET)
 (envelope-from rbarr@cisco.com)
Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (171.71.177.237)
  by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Mar 2004 12:09:41 +0000
Received: from rbarrw2k (dhcp-171-71-102-213.cisco.com [171.71.102.213])
 by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i25JuoF8011735;
 Fri, 5 Mar 2004 11:56:50 -0800 (PST)
Reply-To: <rbarr@cisco.com>
From: "Robert Barr " <rbarr@cisco.com>
To: "'Sebastien Petit'" <spe@bsdfr.org>
Cc: "Robert Barr" <rbarr@cisco.com>
Subject: RE: Patent issue for VRRPv2 and VRRPv3
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 11:56:50 -0800
Message-ID: <00db01c402ec$00268b80$6501a8c0@amer.cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <002a01c402e7$613cc510$6400a8c0@a91821794s3ti7g>

This is our policy for RFC2338. If VRRP v.2 and/or v.3 become
standards-track RFC's (have they?) then this policy applies to those as
well:



Cisco will not assert any patents owned or controlled by Cisco against any
party for making, using, selling, importing or offering for sale a product
that implements IETF RFC 2338, provided, however that:
Cisco retains the right to assert its patents (including the right to claim
past royalties) against any party that asserts a patent it owns or controls
(either directly or indirectly) against Cisco or any of Cisco's affiliates
or successors in title; and Cisco retains the right to assert its patents
against any product or portion thereof that is not necessary for compliance with RFC 2338.
If you have any questions, or if you would prefer a royalty-bearing license
please contact me.
Robert Barr
VP, Intellectual Property
Worldwide Patent Counsel
Cisco Systems
408-525-9706
-----Original Message-----
From: Sebastien Petit [mailto:spe@bsdfr.org]=20
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 11:24 AM
To: rbarr@cisco.com
Subject: Patent issue for VRRPv2 and VRRPv3


Dear Robert Barr,

In order to be conform to the Cisco standards concerning VRRPv2 and VRRPv3
(Patent #5 473 599),  I would like to obtain a legal authorization from
Cisco to implement and use these protocols in OpenSource system environment, so
be conform and compatible between all the existant equipments. OpenSource
systems are not a risk for your company and will profit to network standards. If
you cannot give me an  authorization, other solutions will be done and will be
incompatible with your VRRP standard (like CARP a Common Adress
Redundancy Protocol coming soon under OpenBSD 3.5)
In order to continue my work in the OpenSource domain, can you tell me
if you can give me an authorization for implementing and using VRRPv2,
VRRPv3 ietf standard in a free opensource software (no selling) ?
Is there any parts to request for that same thing ?

Regards,
Sebastien Petit
--
spe@bsdfr.org
spe@selectbourse.net

In Europe, all software and algorithms patents are invalid.