PPP Extensions Working Group Agenda
44th IETF-Minneapolis, MN
77 people signed the blue sheet.
Chair: Karl Fox (
[email protected])
Reported by Matt Holdrege (
[email protected])
Tuesday, March 16, 1999, 1545-1645
PPP-IPSec Interoperability Workshop Update
Anita Freeman <
[email protected]>
Anita Freeman announced the May 23rd-28th PPP/VPN Interoperability workshop
They hope to test:
Ipsec/IKE/CA
L2TP w/o flow control
L2TP w/Ipsec
CCP with MPPC& MPPE
MS Chap V2
EAP
PPTP
PPPoE
SDL
draft-ietf-pppext-sdl-01.txt
James Carlson <
[email protected]>
Why have PPP over SDL for Sonet/SDH?
Low overhead
Zero data expansion
Well characterized algorithm
Freely available
Other options:
Standard octet synchronous HDLC could have overhead under certain
scenarios. With SDL, the header is predictable.
HDLC-32 and Ether-like Framing are other options.
The intentions are for the draft to be a working document for this group.
Others said we already have a method for PPP over Sonet. Why do we need
two? The authors are worried about the overhead of the standard scheme for
link rates higher than OC-192.
It was suggested that the SDL draft state that it's application is only for
speeds higher than OC192. Then it was suggested that SDL be classified as
Experimental.
The authors agreed that the draft would state that it is for speeds above
OC-192 and that it would be in the Experimental class. There were no
further objections.
L2TP
draft-ietf-pppext-l2tp-14.txt
Mark Townsley <
[email protected]>
Mark Townsley and Bill Palter described the status of L2TP
(draft-ietf-pppext-l2tp-14.txt). Most of the items that have been brought
up on the list have been resolved by rough consensus. The issues that have
not yet achieved consensus are L2TP and IPsec and the Cisco IPR issue.
Mark will provide text on how L2TP and IPsec are used together.
The Cisco IPR issue was presented with further discussion put off til
Wednesday.
L2TP ATM Access Network Extensions
draft-ietf-pppext-l2tp-atmext-00.txt
Yves T'joens <
[email protected]>
Yves Tjoens talked on L2TP ATM Access Network Extensions. There were some
questions for clarification, but no significant objections.
Wednesday, March 17, 1999, 1530-1730
L2TP Link Extensions
draft-ietf-pppext-l2tp-link-00.txt
Bill Palter <
[email protected]>
Mark Townsley <
[email protected]>
Bill had nothing to comment on, merely that the draft was available.
Mark Townsley and Bill Palter discussed Cisco's IPR claim on L2TP. Robert
Barr (
[email protected]) from Cisco is the IPR contact and his contact
information is on the IETF IPR web page.
There was unanimous agreement in the room to move the draft forward. A few
people who had agreed to move forward still wanted to ask Cisco to make
clear their intentions about licensing terms for their patents. Mark said
he will do all he can to get Cisco to state that they will treat this issue
with fair and non-discriminatory practices.
