|
Wensong,
Like encryption is so popular this days, US still not allow the free
encryption in software to be freely distributed, For each and
every software/hardware we make, if we use SSL, we will have
to pay a royalty to that company who has patent on it, even we
did not use their software at all. Another example is the jpg
file widely used in the Internet. Unisxx is collecting royalty on its
patent for that, if your web site using any jpg file that is not
created by a software paid patent fee to Unisxx (like all the software
from Adobe paid the patent fee already), then the web master is
responsible for paying Unisxx for $5000 royalty fee. I am
using name Unisxx other than their real name, since I do not want
to be dragged into that battle. We use Adobe software to create
our jpg files on our web sites to avoid that problem. Likelyhood
is that once the LVS software has any code function similar to the
patent in it, the company who holds the patent will go to Court getting
an order to stop everyone in US to distribute your software, shutdown
the mirror sites who carry your mirror in US. Unless we have
enough money to fight this in the Court to either dismiss the
patent, or prove the method that you are using is not infringing
any of their patent.
Wayne
At 11:42 PM 12/29/99 +0800, Wensong Zhang wrote:
>Wayne wrote:
> >
> > Also, one of the commercial company in US already
> > applied a patent on context analysis in thge load balancing
> > software, so we need to be careful there.
> >
>
>I wonder how they apply the patent on context analysis for load
>balancing software, I guess that they must have their own
>"complicated" algorithms on context analysis. Everybody knows how to
>do a simple context analysis for load balancing, parsing the context
>and sending the request to where it is good to be executed. If we use
>this simple method or others, I don't think they can sue me. Right?
>:-)
>
>Wensong
>
>
> > At 11:58 AM 12/23/99 +0100, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> > >On 1999-12-23T10:46:59,
> > > Skliarouk Peter <skliaroukp@xxxxxxxxxxx> said:
> > >
> > > > LVS wouldn't help you - they refuse to implement any context
> > > > analysis in kernel space.
> > >
> > >Thats not entirely correct. We are looking at the issues involved for
> > >context
> > >analysis and how to implement it and if/how we can best benefit from it,
> > >and
> > >can't do it _yet_.
> > >
> > >I am sure this is what you meant, but I just wanted to make sure noone gets
> > >the wrong impression ;)
> > >
> > >Sincerely,
> > > Lars Marowsky-Brée
> > >
> > >--
> > >Lars Marowsky-Brée
> > >Network Management
> > >
> > >teuto.net Netzdienste GmbH
> > >
> > >----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: lvs-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >For additional commands, e-mail: lvs-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: lvs-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > For additional commands, e-mail: lvs-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: lvs-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>For additional commands, e-mail: lvs-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
