home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Internet Info 1997 December
/
Internet_Info_CD-ROM_Walnut_Creek_December_1997.iso
/
ietf
/
pppext
/
ppp-minutes-89july.txt
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1993-02-17
|
4KB
|
142 lines
Point-to-point Protocol Work Group
Chairpersons: Russ Hobby/UC Davis and Drew Perkins/CMU
CURRENT MEETING REPORT
Reported by Russ Hobby
ATTENDEES
1. Cohen, Danny/cohen@isi.edu
2. Coltun, Rob/rcoltun@trantor.umd.edu
3. Deboo, Farokh/fjd@bridge2.esd.3com.com
4. Edwards, David/dle@cisco.com
5. Fair, Erik/fair@apple.com
6. Farinacci, Dino/dino@bridge2.3com.com
7. Fox, Craig/foxcj@nsco.network.com
8. Gross, Phill/pgross@nri.reston.va.us
9. Hobby, Russ/rdhobby@ucdavis.edu
10. Hollingsworth, Greg/gregh@gateway.mitre.org
11. Jolitz, William/william@ernie.berkeley.edu
12. Kaufman, Dave/dek@proteon.com
13. Khanna, Raman/khanna@jessica.stanford.edu
14. Kullberg, Alan/akullberg@bbn.com
15. LoVerso, John R./loverso@xylogics.com
16. Lottor, Mark/mkl@sri-nic.arpa
17. Maas, Andy/maas@jessica.stanford.edu
18. Mamakos, Louis A./louie@trantor.umd.edu
19. McKenney, Paul E./mckenney@sri.com
20. Melohn, Bill/melohn@sun.com
21. Merritt, Don/don@brl.mil
22. Natalie, Ron/ron@rutgers.edu
23. Opalka, Zbigniew/zopalka@bbn.com
24. Perkins, Drew /ddp@andrew.cmu.edu
25. Petry, Mike/petry@trantor.umd.edu
26. Satz, Greg/satz@cisco.com
27. St. Johns, Mike/stjohns@beast.ddn.mil
28. Tsai, Howard/hst@mtuxo.att.com
29. Waldfogel, Asher/wellflt!awaldfog
MINUTES
The PPP WG met on July 24, 25 and 26 at the IETF meeting at Stanford.
Review of the latest draft of the specifications required discussion on the
following areas:
1. An "Executive Summary" needs to be written for the beginning.
2. The PPP document should have less details of the HDLC protocol and have
references to the appropriate documents on HDLC. The PPP document
should include text of specifications that are unique to the PPP
protocol application of HDLC.
3. All discussion of LAPB will be dropped from the document. The Enable
LAPB option will also be removed.
4. There was again discussion of what protocol numbers to use, the
ethernet numbers or new numbers. It was decided to let Jon Postel make
the final decision with arguments presented for each case.
5. There was clarification of the wording in steps 3 and 4 of the
description of the LCP sequence.
6. The Configure Request Request packet and the Character Generator
Request/Reply packets were determined to be unnecessary and would be
dropped.
7. A better description of Async Character Mapping is needed and how it
relates to sync lines.
Many other minor editing changes were suggested and will be incorporated in
the next draft.
The state diagram of the configuration exchange was examined in detail and
the final form will be written up.
There was a lengthy discussion on the best method for doing keepalives. The
final conclusion was that a keep-alive request would be sent to the remote
end containing the number of packets sent. The remote end would send a
keep-alive reply containing the difference in the number of packets sent and
the number of packets received. Policy on when to take the line down could
be determined at each end independently based on the information provided by
the keep-alive packets. A more detailed description of the mechanism will
be written.
There was discussion on what is the minimal implementation of PPP. The
conclusion was: the minimum would be LCP configuration exchange with no
options included. This would be followed by an IP configuration exchange
with no options. The line would then be ready for IP traffic.
Areas in need of further work are:
o Stronger Authentication Protocols
o Definition of encryption methods
o Stronger IP address exchange methods
o Definition of the use of other high level protocols
The group plans to have a document with the agreed specifications finalized
in two weeks followed with a video conference for verification of the text.