Re: FYI: possible infringement of patent by ipf/pf

[Richard Welty <rwelty_(_at_)_averillpark_(_dot_)_net>]

On Sun, 14 Jul 2002 14:02:00 +0100 Andre Lucas <andre_(_at_)_ae-35_(_dot_)_com> wrote:
> The patent appears to be more concerned with the action of a filtering 
> bridge than ipf/pf in router/firewall configuration. I'm not suggesting 
> that there's anything non-obvious about a filtering bridge, but that 
> hasn't stopped the USPTO finding against people in the past.
> 
> Someone could always file a patent for a stateful filtering bridge, and 
> counter-sue Bay ;)

as for prior art, most routers well before 1995 had briding modes. did
cisco (or some other brand) have provision for using their ACLs when in
bridging mode?

i don't really remember, that was a while ago and i was using routers
mostly as routers back then (occasionally as door stops, mostly as routers).
i suppose i could go trudge through old IOS manuals and see if the
capability was there. i think the old telebit netblazer i was using back
around 1990 may have had similar capabilities (that is, ACLs and a briding
mode.)

richard
--
Richard Welty                                         rwelty_(_at_)_averillpark_(_dot_)_net
Averill Park Networking                                         518-573-7592
              Unix, Linux, IP Network Engineering, Security