datatracker.ietf.org
Sign in
Version 5.3.0, 2014-04-12
Report a bug

Enke Chen's Statement about IPR related to draft-marques-idr-best-external-01 belonging to Redback Networks, Inc.

Only those sections of the "Patent Disclosure and Licensing Declaration Template for Notification" where the submitter provided information are displayed.

Update this IPR disclosure. Note: Updates to IPR disclosures must only be made by authorized representatives of the original submitters. Updates will automatically be forwarded to the current Patent Holder's Contact and to the Submitter of the original IPR disclosure.

Submitted Date: March 31, 2009

I. Possible Patent Holder/Applicant ("Patent Holder")
Legal Name: Redback Networks, Inc.
II. Contact Information for the IETF Participant Whose Personal Belief Triggered this Disclosure:
Name: Enke Chen
Title:
Department: Mail Stop SJC20/2/1
Address1: 725 Alder Drive
Address2: Milpitas, CA 95035
Telephone: 408-526-4815
Fax:
Email: enkechen@cisco.com
III. IETF Document or Other Contribution to Which this IPR Disclosure Relates:
Internet-Draft:"Advertisement of the best external route in BGP"
(draft-marques-idr-best-external-01)
IV. Disclosure of Patent Information (i.e., patents or patent applications required to be disclosed by Section 6 of RFC 3979)
A. For granted patents or published pending patent applications, please provide the following information:
Patent, Serial, Publication, Registration, or Application/File number(s): US Patent 7,502,332, Method and apparatus for route oscillation reduction.
Date(s) granted or applied for: March 10, 2009 (Granted)
Country: US
Additional Notes:

Initially disclosed in draft-chen-rr-oscillation-reduce-01.txt dated June 2002:

----------
6. Intellectual Property Considerations

Redback Networks, Inc. may seek patent protection on some of the
technology described in this Internet Draft. If technology in this
document is adopted as a standard, Redback Networks agrees to
license, on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, any patent
rights it obtains covering such technology to the extent necessary to
comply with the standard.

B. Does this disclosure relate to an unpublished pending patent application?: NO
C. If an Internet-Draft or RFC includes multiple parts and it is not reasonably apparent which part of such Internet-Draft or RFC is alleged to be covered by the patent information disclosed in Section V(A) or V(B), it is helpful if the discloser identifies here the sections of the Internet-Draft or RFC that are alleged to be so covered:
No information submitted