Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
19 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

Alexey E. Suslikov
Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard. Read here
http://trends.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/28/2320232

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

J.C. Roberts-2
On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:54:14 +0300, "Alexey E. Suslikov"
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard. Read here
>http://trends.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/28/2320232

This sucks. It's no different than what Cisco did with their HSRP patent
to try to kill off VRRP. The Huawei IPR claim to the IETF is nearly
identical to the crap Cisco put out years ago in their IPR claim.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?ipr_id=724

The end result is we have CARP, a patent busting implementation that is
far better than either of the originals...

Will they never learn?

Anyone in the mood for "slog" ?

jcr


--
Free, Open Source CAD, CAM and EDA Tools
http://www.DesignTools.org

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

Nick Guenther
On 7/1/06, J.C. Roberts <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:54:14 +0300, "Alexey E. Suslikov"
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard. Read here
> >http://trends.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/28/2320232
>
> This sucks. It's no different than what Cisco did with their HSRP patent
> to try to kill off VRRP. The Huawei IPR claim to the IETF is nearly
> identical to the crap Cisco put out years ago in their IPR claim.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?ipr_id=724
>
> The end result is we have CARP, a patent busting implementation that is
> far better than either of the originals...
>
> Will they never learn?
>
> Anyone in the mood for "slog" ?

Isn't syslog just like... send random data on port 514 to whoever and
they record it? How can you possibly patent that? That would be like
patenting talking.

-Nick

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

Jim Razmus
* Nick Guenther <[hidden email]> [060702 15:58]:

> On 7/1/06, J.C. Roberts <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:54:14 +0300, "Alexey E. Suslikov"
> ><[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >>Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard. Read here
> >>http://trends.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/28/2320232
> >
> >This sucks. It's no different than what Cisco did with their HSRP patent
> >to try to kill off VRRP. The Huawei IPR claim to the IETF is nearly
> >identical to the crap Cisco put out years ago in their IPR claim.
> >
> >https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?ipr_id=724
> >
> >The end result is we have CARP, a patent busting implementation that is
> >far better than either of the originals...
> >
> >Will they never learn?
> >
> >Anyone in the mood for "slog" ?
>
> Isn't syslog just like... send random data on port 514 to whoever and
> they record it? How can you possibly patent that? That would be like
> patenting talking.
>
> -Nick
>

I hold the patent on talking.  Watch for a battery of law suits
forthcoming.

Sorry, couldn't resist.  Laugh people.

Jim

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

J.C. Roberts-2
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 18:55:46 -0400, Jim Razmus <[hidden email]> wrote:

>* Nick Guenther <[hidden email]> [060702 15:58]:
>> On 7/1/06, J.C. Roberts <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:54:14 +0300, "Alexey E. Suslikov"
>> ><[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard. Read here
>> >>http://trends.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/28/2320232
>> >
>> >This sucks. It's no different than what Cisco did with their HSRP patent
>> >to try to kill off VRRP. The Huawei IPR claim to the IETF is nearly
>> >identical to the crap Cisco put out years ago in their IPR claim.
>> >
>> >https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?ipr_id=724
>> >
>> >The end result is we have CARP, a patent busting implementation that is
>> >far better than either of the originals...
>> >
>> >Will they never learn?
>> >
>> >Anyone in the mood for "slog" ?
>>
>> Isn't syslog just like... send random data on port 514 to whoever and
>> they record it? How can you possibly patent that? That would be like
>> patenting talking.
>>
>> -Nick
>>
>
>I hold the patent on talking.  Watch for a battery of law suits
>forthcoming.
>
>Sorry, couldn't resist.  Laugh people.
>
>Jim

Jim,

I really wish I could laugh about it... -I put my time and effort into
getting the VRRP crap settled Cisco (i.e. Robert Bar), so we could just
use a "standard" protocol -and no, I'm not the only human being around
here that wasted their time and effort on this particular problem.

Think about the time/effort/planing the developers put into making CARP
such that it gets around the Cisco patent...

Don't misunderstand me, CARP is an amazingly innovative and extremely
useful implementation of a redundancy protocol. It's technically better
than HSRP or any of the versions of VRRP but the problems till stands
that it is not an "official" protocol, which simply means adoption and
inter operability will suffer to some degree.

Frivolous patents have a cost to those who fight them.

jcr


--
Free, Open Source CAD, CAM and EDA Tools
http://www.DesignTools.org

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

Theo de Raadt
> Don't misunderstand me, CARP is an amazingly innovative and extremely
> useful implementation of a redundancy protocol. It's technically better
> than HSRP or any of the versions of VRRP but the problems till stands
> that it is not an "official" protocol, which simply means adoption and
> inter operability will suffer to some degree.

You are wrong.  It is officially free and unencumbered.

Now if you wish to redeclare the word "official" to mean "because
some corporate people playing politics have dictated it be so",
fine, be that way.

But when you do so you are doing two things:

1. Limiting yourself.

2. Giving them the power to do it again.

I suppose that is your choice.  Keep saying that the Man is right.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

J.C. Roberts-2
In reply to this post by Nick Guenther
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 15:52:57 -0400, "Nick Guenther" <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>On 7/1/06, J.C. Roberts <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:54:14 +0300, "Alexey E. Suslikov"
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> >Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard. Read here
>> >http://trends.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/28/2320232
>>
>> This sucks. It's no different than what Cisco did with their HSRP patent
>> to try to kill off VRRP. The Huawei IPR claim to the IETF is nearly
>> identical to the crap Cisco put out years ago in their IPR claim.
>>
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?ipr_id=724
>>
>> The end result is we have CARP, a patent busting implementation that is
>> far better than either of the originals...
>>
>> Will they never learn?
>>
>> Anyone in the mood for "slog" ?
>
>Isn't syslog just like... send random data on port 514 to whoever and
>they record it? How can you possibly patent that? That would be like
>patenting talking.
>
>-Nick

Basically you are correct about *current* syslog implementations. The
two goals of the syslog standard work being done are (1) defining a
message format and (2) providing a "secure" transport of said messages.

In short, secure inter-operability of syslog across various systems.

No one knows what's in the "sealed" patent application at the moment
since it has not been publicly released but considering the guys
claiming the patent have been involved in the syslog standards process,
you can reasonably certain some degree of dishonesty and corruption are
involved.

JCR


--
Free, Open Source CAD, CAM and EDA Tools
http://www.DesignTools.org

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

laurent FANIS
Greetings

Couldn't resist asking but can they really patent :
"sending "formatted" data over SSL" ?
That is just plain ridiculous !!
If i remember correctly the is also an RFC just for syslog under BSD.
A lot of devices already have syslog build in (for instance my AP
piece of crap USR has a syslog function) machines are going to be
pulled of the market ? That is plain dumb, we are heading for another
one of those frenzy" lets patent everything".

Best regards Laurent

On 7/3/06, J.C. Roberts <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 15:52:57 -0400, "Nick Guenther" <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> >On 7/1/06, J.C. Roberts <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:54:14 +0300, "Alexey E. Suslikov"
> >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard. Read here
> >> >http://trends.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/28/2320232
> >>
> >> This sucks. It's no different than what Cisco did with their HSRP patent
> >> to try to kill off VRRP. The Huawei IPR claim to the IETF is nearly
> >> identical to the crap Cisco put out years ago in their IPR claim.
> >>
> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?ipr_id=724
> >>
> >> The end result is we have CARP, a patent busting implementation that is
> >> far better than either of the originals...
> >>
> >> Will they never learn?
> >>
> >> Anyone in the mood for "slog" ?
> >
> >Isn't syslog just like... send random data on port 514 to whoever and
> >they record it? How can you possibly patent that? That would be like
> >patenting talking.
> >
> >-Nick
>
> Basically you are correct about *current* syslog implementations. The
> two goals of the syslog standard work being done are (1) defining a
> message format and (2) providing a "secure" transport of said messages.
>
> In short, secure inter-operability of syslog across various systems.
>
> No one knows what's in the "sealed" patent application at the moment
> since it has not been publicly released but considering the guys
> claiming the patent have been involved in the syslog standards process,
> you can reasonably certain some degree of dishonesty and corruption are
> involved.
>
> JCR
>
>
> --
> Free, Open Source CAD, CAM and EDA Tools
> http://www.DesignTools.org

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

J.C. Roberts-2
In reply to this post by Theo de Raadt
On Sun, 02 Jul 2006 22:09:02 -0600, Theo de Raadt
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>> Don't misunderstand me, CARP is an amazingly innovative and extremely
>> useful implementation of a redundancy protocol. It's technically better
>> than HSRP or any of the versions of VRRP but the problems till stands
>> that it is not an "official" protocol, which simply means adoption and
>> inter operability will suffer to some degree.
>
>You are wrong.  It is officially free and unencumbered.
>
>Now if you wish to redeclare the word "official" to mean "because
>some corporate people playing politics have dictated it be so",
>fine, be that way.
>
>But when you do so you are doing two things:
>
>1. Limiting yourself.
>
>2. Giving them the power to do it again.
>
>I suppose that is your choice.  Keep saying that the Man is right.


I'm a bit confused by your reply. Yes, I kind of see what you mean but
it also seems I failed miserably to write things clearly. By putting
"Official" in quotes, I was trying to point out the stupidity of the bad
corporate decisions that occur far too often.

There are countless corporate idiots which make the wrong choice because
they like to waive a nonsense marketing banner saying that they are
"Compliant" with some "official" standard, regardless if there is a
standardized, completely free, unincumbered and technically superior
replacement available. Those bad decisions do slow adoption of a free
replacement (CARP) and in general, affect inter operability of systems
because they chose to support some encumbered protocol rather than CARP.

I can kind of see how saying their decisions are wrong/bad might be
limiting but I don't understand how it would give them more power to do
it again?

I've got this bad feeling that I'm missing something that should be
totally obvious... please apply the clue stick.

jcr


--
Free, Open Source CAD, CAM and EDA Tools
http://www.DesignTools.org

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

Theo de Raadt
> I'm a bit confused by your reply. Yes, I kind of see what you mean but
> it also seems I failed miserably to write things clearly. By putting
> "Official" in quotes, I was trying to point out the stupidity of the bad
> corporate decisions that occur far too often.
>
> There are countless corporate idiots which make the wrong choice because
> they like to waive a nonsense marketing banner saying that they are
> "Compliant" with some "official" standard, regardless if there is a
> standardized, completely free, unincumbered and technically superior
> replacement available. Those bad decisions do slow adoption of a free
> replacement (CARP) and in general, affect inter operability of systems
> because they chose to support some encumbered protocol rather than CARP.
>
> I can kind of see how saying their decisions are wrong/bad might be
> limiting but I don't understand how it would give them more power to do
> it again?
>
> I've got this bad feeling that I'm missing something that should be
> totally obvious... please apply the clue stick.

What did you miss?

By even using "official" in quotes, and your statement:

>> Don't misunderstand me, CARP is an amazingly innovative and extremely
>> useful implementation of a redundancy protocol. It's technically better
>> than HSRP or any of the versions of VRRP but the problems till stands
>> that it is not an "official" protocol, which simply means adoption and
>> inter operability will suffer to some degree.

What are you doing?  You are saying that your prediction is that
it WILL suffer in adoption, it WILL suffer in inter operability.

Keep at it.  You might get what you want.  Because what you wrote, it
is what you wanted right?

The problem is there are a whole lot of people who are willing to discuss
the problems their ideas/implimentations face.  And it actually does
affect the adoption of our stuff.  That's because noone from a corporate
role would every say such a thing.

So go ahead, be honest.  Fight the losing fight.

The fact is that CARP (+ pfsync + sasync) kicks the crap out of anything
that is standardized......

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

Clint Pachl
In reply to this post by J.C. Roberts-2
J.C. Roberts wrote:
> Don't misunderstand me, CARP is an amazingly innovative and extremely
> useful implementation of a redundancy protocol. It's technically better
> than HSRP or any of the versions of VRRP but the problems till stands
> that it is not an "official" protocol, which simply means adoption and
> inter operability will suffer to some degree.

Adoption and interoperability are immaterial if everything is OBSD of
course. I wonder what percentage of people using OBSD face
interoperability issues? Isn't CARP so easy, and OBSD in general, that
you just want to install it on all of your machines?

-pachl

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

J.C. Roberts-2
In reply to this post by laurent FANIS
On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 09:40:01 +0300, "laurent FANIS"
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>Couldn't resist asking but can they really patent :
>"sending "formatted" data over SSL" ?
>That is just plain ridiculous !!

As far as I know, at the moment it's only a patent *application* rather
than a granted patent. You can *apply* for a patent on anything you like
but that doesn't mean the patent will be granted.

>If i remember correctly the is also an RFC just for syslog under BSD.
>A lot of devices already have syslog build in (for instance my AP
>piece of crap USR has a syslog function) machines are going to be
>pulled of the market ? That is plain dumb, we are heading for another
>one of those frenzy" lets patent everything".

You a said "another" ? -Unfortunately, the frenzy has never stopped or
even slowed down, instead, it's only continued to grow worse.

jcr


--
Free, Open Source CAD, CAM and EDA Tools
http://www.DesignTools.org

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

J.C. Roberts-2
In reply to this post by Theo de Raadt
On Mon, 03 Jul 2006 01:14:59 -0600, Theo de Raadt
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>> I'm a bit confused by your reply. Yes, I kind of see what you mean but
>> it also seems I failed miserably to write things clearly. By putting
>> "Official" in quotes, I was trying to point out the stupidity of the bad
>> corporate decisions that occur far too often.
>>
>> There are countless corporate idiots which make the wrong choice because
>> they like to waive a nonsense marketing banner saying that they are
>> "Compliant" with some "official" standard, regardless if there is a
>> standardized, completely free, unincumbered and technically superior
>> replacement available. Those bad decisions do slow adoption of a free
>> replacement (CARP) and in general, affect inter operability of systems
>> because they chose to support some encumbered protocol rather than CARP.
>>
>> I can kind of see how saying their decisions are wrong/bad might be
>> limiting but I don't understand how it would give them more power to do
>> it again?
>>
>> I've got this bad feeling that I'm missing something that should be
>> totally obvious... please apply the clue stick.
>
>What did you miss?
>
>By even using "official" in quotes, and your statement:
>
>>> Don't misunderstand me, CARP is an amazingly innovative and extremely
>>> useful implementation of a redundancy protocol. It's technically better
>>> than HSRP or any of the versions of VRRP but the problems till stands
>>> that it is not an "official" protocol, which simply means adoption and
>>> inter operability will suffer to some degree.
>
>What are you doing?  You are saying that your prediction is that
>it WILL suffer in adoption, it WILL suffer in inter operability.
>
>Keep at it.  You might get what you want.  Because what you wrote, it
>is what you wanted right?
>
>The problem is there are a whole lot of people who are willing to discuss
>the problems their ideas/implimentations face.  And it actually does
>affect the adoption of our stuff.  That's because noone from a corporate
>role would every say such a thing.
>
>So go ahead, be honest.  Fight the losing fight.
>
>The fact is that CARP (+ pfsync + sasync) kicks the crap out of anything
>that is standardized......

Got it. It's the ``self-fulfilling prophecy '' thing. Thanks.

jcr


--
Free, Open Source CAD, CAM and EDA Tools
http://www.DesignTools.org

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

laurent FANIS
In reply to this post by J.C. Roberts-2
On 7/3/06, J. C. Roberts <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 09:40:01 +0300, "laurent FANIS"
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >Couldn't resist asking but can they really patent :
> >"sending "formatted" data over SSL" ?
> >That is just plain ridiculous !!
>
> As far as I know, at the moment it's only a patent *application* rather
> than a granted patent. You can *apply* for a patent on anything you like
> but that doesn't mean the patent will be granted.
>
Yeah that is true i didn't see it but wouldn't be possible to buy off
people ?I mean the company is in china and it is a country that has a
certain degree of corruption.This is what i'm afraid of too.And
countries/companies  are bending over to get parts in the country
growing economics (cough *yahoo* cough *google*).Anyways that is
off-topic and I don't have that much liberties in my country so i will
shut up now.

> >If i remember correctly the is also an RFC just for syslog under BSD.
> >A lot of devices already have syslog build in (for instance my AP
> >piece of crap USR has a syslog function) machines are going to be
> >pulled of the market ? That is plain dumb, we are heading for another
> >one of those frenzy" lets patent everything".
>
> You a said "another" ? -Unfortunately, the frenzy has never stopped or
> even slowed down, instead, it's only continued to grow worse.

Well i felt it calmed down a little after some debacle in the
states,but then again i was wrong , sorry .

Best Regards Laurent.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

Martin Schröder
2006/7/3, laurent FANIS <[hidden email]>:
> Yeah that is true i didn't see it but wouldn't be possible to buy off
> people ?I mean the company is in china and it is a country that has a
> certain degree of corruption.This is what i'm afraid of too.

You are right to a degree (the patent will surely be tried in USA
too), but it's also a question of double standards. I wonder how the
USA will see the patent system in 2020 when most of the patents will
come out of China...

Best
   Martin

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

Spruell, Darren-Perot
In reply to this post by Alexey E. Suslikov
From: [hidden email]

> > useful implementation of a redundancy protocol. It's
> technically better
> > than HSRP or any of the versions of VRRP but the problems
> till stands
> > that it is not an "official" protocol, which simply means
> adoption and
> > inter operability will suffer to some degree.
>
> Adoption and interoperability are immaterial if everything is OBSD of
> course. I wonder what percentage of people using OBSD face
> interoperability issues? Isn't CARP so easy, and OBSD in
> general, that
> you just want to install it on all of your machines?

That's one option, though we've already seen at least one other
implementation of CARP pop up, the userland one for other *nix OSes (UCARP -
http://www.ucarp.org/project/ucarp).

What it would take is for other vendors who provide HA services via VRRP
(countless) to learn of the availability of CARP and implement it in their
own equipment. Once one or two do this, others should begin to jump on
board, and someone may actually pop up and decide to throw it through the
IETF for standardization so that the others can get their warm fuzzies and
consider it "official" as JCR was saying. Because we know its not official
until big American corporation say it is and monkey their customers into
paying for its "officialness."

Self-fulfilling prophecy: then we can get on target with the back and forth
we've seen with OpenSSH already...

Vendor: OpenSSH doesn't cost anything. Can we use it and just violate the
GPL?
Advisor: It's under the BSDL. You don't have to violate anything, just use
it. You should donate to the project though.
Vendor: Great. Take it, implement it, sell it, and don't make any donations.
Screw those guys.
OpenBSD: You guys using OpenSSH should donate money because we help you
succeed.
Vendor: Take off, we don't owe you anything, eh?
Advisor: Oh look, they also have a CARP protocol that does everything VRRP
does and more, and doesn't have that scary patent thing hanging over it.
Vendor: Great. $$$ Ka-ching $$$
Advisor: Dontaions?
OpenBSD: Donations?
Vendor: Piss off.

DS

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

Chris Cappuccio
In reply to this post by J.C. Roberts-2
J.C. Roberts [[hidden email]] wrote:
>
> This sucks. It's no different than what Cisco did with their HSRP patent
> to try to kill off VRRP. The Huawei IPR claim to the IETF is nearly
> identical to the crap Cisco put out years ago in their IPR claim.
>

It's funny how these Chinese guys like to rip-off Cisco.  First they rip off
Cisco IOS, by virtue they rip off all of Cisco's bugs, and now they rip off
Cisco's intellectual property stance.  How do you rip off an intellectual
property stance?  It's counter-intuitive.  Either way, this makes them look
like the biggest fucking idiots ever.

--
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

Lars Hansson
On Tuesday 04 July 2006 05:05, Chris Cappuccio wrote:
> Either way, this makes them look like the biggest fucking idiots ever.

Most people who have ever had to use any of their devices knew this already.

---
Lars Hansson

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Patent jeopardizes IETF syslog standard

J.C. Roberts-2
On Tue, 4 Jul 2006 10:32:34 +0800, Lars Hansson <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>On Tuesday 04 July 2006 05:05, Chris Cappuccio wrote:
>> Either way, this makes them look like the biggest fucking idiots ever.
>
>Most people who have ever had to use any of their devices knew this already.
>
>---
>Lars Hansson


(; now that was truly funny... and sad.

jcr


--
Free, Open Source CAD, CAM and EDA Tools
http://www.DesignTools.org