home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
- CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_
-
-
- Reported by Eliot Lear/Intelligenetics
-
- NNTP Minutes
-
- There were three meetings of the Network News Transport Protocol Working
- Group.
-
- There was also an area meeting which included the NNTP, LIST, 822-EXT,
- and SMTP Chairs, along with the Area Director. This is to say, Eliot
- Lear, David Lippke, Greg Vaudreuil, and Russ Hobby.
-
- The following items were explored at the various meetings:
-
-
- 1. Differences Between Mail and News.
- We should consider moving towards a common user interface between
- mail and news. Similar message formats have made this possible in
- the past. With the advent of a new message format for mail, news
- will need to adopt some similar standard pretty quickly (ARE YOU
- READING THIS, NEWS READER PEOPLE?????). There was discussion of
- moving to unite the news and mail formats. While conceptually it
- sounds like a good thing, the details need to be kinked out, and
- the question needs to be discussed to death.
-
- Russ asked what a document be put out that describes the current
- news architecture. Erik Fair has volunteered to write that
- document. That document should almost certainly include a safe way
- to gateway news and mail. Conceivably another document will issue
- from the area recommending a course of action.
-
- 2. News Reader Capabilities.
- First, it was the consensus of the group that this topic is really
- part of the Charter of the NNTP group; we're just considering
- splitting new functionality into a separate protocol.
-
- The current version of the draft contains very little enhancements
- in the area of news reader capabilities. This is because the Chair
- does not have any real concrete language in front of him from what
- this group wants. The consensus, therefore, was to push on with
- the transport document,and explore further the reader issues, and
- in particular how this relates to Item 1.
-
- If we do produce an NNRP document, we must be careful that by its
- nature it would steer development away from useful areas (Ittai
- Hershman's paraphrased comments). In this vein, if we do produce a
- document, we should consider it an experimental effort rather than
- a standards track effort.
-
- Along the lines of a news reader protocol, Stan Barber brought
- along a one page shopping list of items he would like to see in a
-
- 1
-
-
-
-
-
- reader protocol. We discussed how to define a search command so
- that it would be generally useful. Arguments for and against a
- specific syntax and mechanism were heard.
-
- 3. Authentication
- Theodore Tso is now the official ``stuckee'' for the SAAG in the
- NNTP Working Group. Issues of Common Authentication Technology
- (CAT) were discussed, particularly at the Thursday meeting. Text
- needs to be written into the document to take advantage of CAT. We
- are facing a problem with CAT because NNTP is one of the first
- protocols to use it. Currently CAT can only be used to access
- Kerberos and DEC SPX. Jeff Schiller suggested that a simple
- challenge/response method would be acceptable if someone did the
- footwork. Clear text, however, seemed to be right out, to the
- point where it was thought that the SAAG might hold things up.
- Jeff also discussed the evils of negotiating security methods.
-
- It turns out that some of the logic that was applied to mail
- standards can be applied to news. If we do, in fact, move the
- transport document to proposed standard, the impetus for
- authentication in the transport is greatly diminished.
-
- 4. Transporting Binary and Mixed Message Format.
- It turns out that simply adopting the mail standards as news
- standards may be a bit painful. With the introduction of binary,
- there needs to be a new canonical form. This in itself would be a
- minor irritation; however, the new mail format allows for mixed
- binary and text. This means that it could be necessary to switch
- between binary and text canonical forms in a single message. This
- makes transport a nightmare, and is a good argument for encoding.
- On the other hand, possibly the new binary canonical form might be
- able to handle the problems. Interested parties are URGED to read
- the draft mail documents and the archive of messages leading to
- their production.
-
- 5. CCITT
- Harri Salminen circulated a draft document that is CCITT's version
- of netnews. The document may be retrieved from nic.nordu.net, via
- anonymous FTP. Your comments are, of course, solicited.
-
- 6. Problems with the Current Document
- Several people have sent notes pointing out formatting problems,
- grammatical errors, and certain inconsistencies (like SIMPLE
- authentication descriptions). Please mail all such complaints
- directly to the Chair, and not to the list.
-
- It was the consensus of the group that the IMAGE and BINARY options
- be combined into a FORMAT option. Eliot Lear will write some text
- in to this effect. It was also agreed that the COMPRESSION and
- DATE commands would be removed, and that the NEWNEWS command be
- extended to deal with DATE's purpose (which is to say that NEWNEWS
- will both accept and deliver a cookie instead of a date). Text to
-
-
- 2
-
-
-
-
-
- be written and argued.
-
- State diagrams need to be completed.
-
- Default behavior needs to be defined and mandated.
-
- We discussed eliminating the OPTION command. The problem with
- eliminating the OPTION command is that it gets hard to batch verbs,
- and we concluded that batching such things was a good idea.
-
- 7. Making the IETF lists available to the IETF via netnews.
- This issue was brought up both in the Working Group and in the area
- meeting. Some action is expected in this area Real Soon Now (tm).
- Social issues were discussed in the Wednesday meeting regarding the
- perceived stigma from which news suffers.
-
- 8. News MIB
- Russ Hobby stated that he would not require a News MIB from us.
- However, several people have indicated some interest in managing
- news objects, particularly Jim Thompson (not present at Atlanta).
- Jim should proceed to take comments and write up a document. One
- should be careful to study which functions are ubiquitous
- throughout the Internet, and which are implementation specific.
-
- 9. Timetable
- August 31, 1991 - We would like to see the NNTP document become an
- Internet Draft. All this does is expose the document to the
- Internet community. It can be changed from within the Working
- Group after that point.
-
- November, 1991 - Get architecture document out as an informational
- RFC.
-
- December, 1991 - After considering comments and making appropriate
- changes, let the NNTP document proceed to proposed standard.
-
- It is hoped that some code will be ready by December.
-
- 10. Multicasting Netnews
- Brief mention was made on a research effort under way to explore
- the possible use of multicast packets as a way for distribution of
- news. Interested parties should contact the Chair directly.
-
- 11. Next Meeting
- No next meeting date has been set as of yet. Depending on how we
- proceed with a news message format, we may meet at Interop
- (October).
-
- 12. General Information
- If you wish to be added to the ietf-nntp mailing list, you should
- send mail to ietf-nntp-request@turbo.bio.net.
-
- 3
-
-
-
-
-
- Drafts and message archives can be gotten from turbo.bio.net via
- anonymous FTP in the ietf-nntp directory. The format of draft
- document filenames is documentname.format-type.
-
-
- Attendees
-
- Stan Barber
- Robert Enger enger@seka.scc.com
- Erik Fair fair@apple.com
- Ned Freed ned@innosoft.com
- Olafur Gudmundsson ogud@cs.umd.edu
- Ittai Hershman ittai@nis.ans.net
- Russ Hobby rdhobby@ucdavis.edu
- Neil Katin katin@eng.sun.com
- Eliot Lear lear@turbo.bio.net
- David Lippke lippke@utdallas.edu
- Joseph Malcom jmalcom@sura.net
- Chris Myers chris@wugate.wustl.edu
- Michael Patton map@lcs.mit.edu
- Mel Pleasant pleasant@hardees.rutgers.edu
- Jan Michael Rynning jmr@nada.kth.se
- Harri Salminen hks@funet.fi
- Theodore Tso
- Gregory Vaudreuil gvaudre@nri.reston.va.us
-
-
-
- 4
-