> -----Original Message----- > From: Christoph Lameter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Christoph, You got your subject backwards, but this is OK... > How much will the permission cost for a hardware vendor to be > allowed to implement LRO? The question did not even occur to me until you asked - we are technology company not an IP company. As one man opinion, if and when the application goes through we should "opensource" it in order to facilitate a more generic NIC implementation. The LRO driver code will be obviously released under GPL much earlier. In the meantime, if any NIC vendor wants to copy our implementation rather than create their own, please send us a formal request and we will create a precedent; this may be the only way to convince skeptics :-) > > That is not true. The proposed implementation is not covered > by the lawsuit. Chelsio got a legal review before posting the > patches to insure that this is not the case. With several tens of already granted and very broad TOE-related patents, this statement sounds rather naïve, and I just wish anyone good luck defending it in the future... Are you saying that if both Linux community and IHVs were to implement the proposed TOE interface, they are "guaranteed" not to violate any third-party IP?? Only broad industry consortium with enough joint IP could possibly guarantee that. I would love to see the review you are referring to, but do not hold my breath :-). - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
