|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org From: Mel Beckman <mel@beckman.org> To: Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 16:07:44 +0000 In-Reply-To: <CAPkb-7BWtXN65xE_5rPr4JnQdMXPxPaWEKZrkAiZLLLJ0eyciQ@mail.gmail.com> Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org> Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org Balder, That may well be the subject of one of the other patents. Also, there is no= requirement under US patent law to build a prototype. It just has to be po= ssible for one "usually skilled in the art" to construct one from the conte= nt of the patent. Also, most patents are not for a complete system. They ju= st describe the function of a single invention, possibly useful in a larger= system. For example, consider the patent of a gravity escapement in a cloc= k (No. 739,245. Pat. Sept 15, 1903. W. Willmann). The escapement is useless= on its own, but has application in many mechanical clocks, including watch= es. =20 So there's no requirement that the patent explain how IPv4 addresses are ac= quired by the client. -mel beckman > On Jul 13, 2015, at 8:58 AM, Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl@gmail.com> = wrote: >=20 > Too bad it won't actually work. I type Slashdot.org in my browser. The we= b > browser does DNS lookup. The CPE notices there is only an A record > available and boots the IPv4 stack. However there is no way to push an IP= v4 > configuration to my computer. DHCP is pull not push. Even if there was, t= he > web browser would not be prepared for an IPv4 configuration to suddenly > appear in the middle of a request. >=20 > I notice the patent application does not actually specify how this is > supposed to work. It should not be possible to patent without building a > prototype and indeed without even knowing how to build one. Then if someo= ne > later figures out the details, you somehow owe your soul to these guys th= at > just did some handwaving. >=20 > Regards >=20 > Baldur > Den 13/07/2015 17.33 skrev "Shane Ronan" <shane@ronan-online.com>: >=20 >> This is actually a good idea. Roll out an IPV6 only network and only pas= s >> out an IPV4 address if it's needed based on actual traffic. >>> On Jul 13, 2015 11:27 AM, "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> wrote: >>>=20 >>> In article <CAP032TteiL3=3Dk=3D >>> vs-KEdGU276fWGXqn1J9jmORLq8sW4xPE-Wg@mail.gmail.com> you write: >>>> http://www.google.com/patents/US20130254423 >>>=20 >>> 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. >>>=20 >>> 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. >>>=20 >>> I can't imagine how anyone would misread this as a patent on IPv6. >>>=20 >>> R's, >>> John >>>=20 >>=20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |