Subject: [nemo] Implementation requirements and IPR

From: Henrik Petander <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 13:37:35 +0300

Hi,

The IPR issue was left open at the last IETF. Is there any new
information about the Cisco claims?

IMHO the coverage of the Cisco claims should be known before deciding
which part of the protocol is a MUST to implement. That is unless we
accept that all implementations of the basic protocol depend or might 
depend on non-royalty-free patents.

Henrik