|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org Date: 13 Jul 2015 15:25:51 -0000 From: "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> To: nanog@nanog.org In-Reply-To: <CAP032TteiL3=k=vs-KEdGU276fWGXqn1J9jmORLq8sW4xPE-Wg@mail.gmail.com> Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org In article <CAP032TteiL3=k=vs-KEdGU276fWGXqn1J9jmORLq8sW4xPE-Wg@mail.gmail.com> you write: >http://www.google.com/patents/US20130254423 This is not a patent. It is a patent application. Most applications do not turn into patents, or at least not with all of the claims included. If you look at the claims, which are what matter, this is for a rather specific hack in a broadband router which assigns a v4 address on the fly when a DNS lookup from behind the router returns a result that suggests that v4 traffic will happen, presumably by returning an A record. I can't imagine how anyone would misread this as a patent on IPv6. R's, John
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |