[34860] in bugtraq
Re: NISCC Vulnerability Advisory 236929: Vulnerability Issues in TCP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Bob Beck)
Wed May 12 13:31:37 2004
Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 16:50:59 -0600
From: Bob Beck <beck@bofh.cns.ualberta.ca>
To: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Cc: David Ahmad <da@securityfocus.com>, bugtraq@securityfocus.com
Message-ID: <20040511225059.GC13701@bofh.cns.ualberta.ca>
Mail-Followup-To: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>,
David Ahmad <da@securityfocus.com>, bugtraq@securityfocus.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87n04fmcra.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tcpm-tcpsecure-00.txt
>
> In the meantime, the IETF has disclosed the following IPR statement
> from Cisco:
>
> <http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/cisco-ipr-draft-ietf-tcpm-tcpsecure.txt>
Translation - BOHICA, Cisco doesn't want people writing compatible
free network stacks, they want to patent TCP. RAND basically means no
free software, you must license on some terms. So we end up with
stupid situations like we did with VRRP (see
http://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html for that sordid tale), and the IETF
will roll over and piddle on itself insted of standing up to this
nonsense like W3C does. This is nasty.
-Bob
