Re: Future of the PPP WG

--===============2038857404448898969==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec50160fbc49edb04acca9617

--bcaec50160fbc49edb04acca9617
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi Donald,

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 6:24 AM, Donald Eastlake <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> In case you were unaware, I am now the Chair of PPPEXT.
>
> Generally, there has been little activity in this WG for some years.
> Although I believe it serves a useful purpose in examining PPP
> proposals, possibly that purpose could be served by just continuing
> the mailing list. In any case, it seems likely that, if the situation
> continues unchanged, the WG will be dissolved sometime early next
> year.
>
> In the process of producing RFC 6361, it became very apparent that the
> PPP security RFCs, such as they are, meet few, if any, modern IETF
> security guidelines. I believe that there should be an update of PPP
> security or, if an effort to update them fails for some reason, then
> at least old / inadequate / unimplemented PPP security RFCs should be
> declared historic.
>
> My suggestion is that PPPEXT re-Charter to include a goal such as the
> above and I'm willing to try drafting a new Charter but welcome
> suggestions and comments on all this.
>

Besides security, there are also other efforts and active documents, such
as,
draft-boucadair-pppext-portrange-option-08
draft-freedman-pppext-ipv6-6rd-00
draft-hu-pppext-ipv6cp-extensions

And for example, we are working revision of
"draft-hu-pppext-ipv6cp-extensions" to report
the progress (e.g., the implementations, trials in pratical networks) by
now.


> One question is, should PPPEXT have a 1 hour meeting at the November
> IETF meeting? I think that would be the best way to come to consensus
> on this but obviously only if enough people would plan to actually
> attend. So, I'd be interested in who is would attend and any opinions
> for or against such a meeting.
>

I'll be there if there is one.


Cheers,
Jacni


>
> Thanks,
> Donald
> =============================
>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>  155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
>  [email protected]
> _______________________________________________
> Pppext mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext
>

--bcaec50160fbc49edb04acca9617
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<font face=3D"verdana,sans-serif">Hi Donald,<br></font><br><div class=3D"gm=
ail_quote">On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 6:24 AM, Donald Eastlake <span dir=3D"ltr=
">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a>&gt;</span> w=
rote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Hi,<br>
<br>
In case you were unaware, I am now the Chair of PPPEXT.<br>
<br>
Generally, there has been little activity in this WG for some years.<br>
Although I believe it serves a useful purpose in examining PPP<br>
proposals, possibly that purpose could be served by just continuing<br>
the mailing list. In any case, it seems likely that, if the situation<br>
continues unchanged, the WG will be dissolved sometime early next<br>
year.<br>
<br>
In the process of producing RFC 6361, it became very apparent that the<br>
PPP security RFCs, such as they are, meet few, if any, modern IETF<br>
security guidelines. I believe that there should be an update of PPP<br>
security or, if an effort to update them fails for some reason, then<br>
at least old / inadequate / unimplemented PPP security RFCs should be<br>
declared historic.<br>
<br>
My suggestion is that PPPEXT re-Charter to include a goal such as the<br>
above and I&#39;m willing to try drafting a new Charter but welcome<br>
suggestions and comments on all this.<br></blockquote><div><br>Besides secu=
rity, there are also other efforts and active documents, such as,<br>draft-=
boucadair-pppext-portrange-option-08<br>draft-freedman-pppext-ipv6-6rd-00<b=
r>
draft-hu-pppext-ipv6cp-extensions<br><br>And for example, we are working re=
vision of &quot;draft-hu-pppext-ipv6cp-extensions&quot; to report<br>the pr=
ogress (e.g., the implementations, trials in pratical networks) by now.<br>
<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.=
8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
One question is, should PPPEXT have a 1 hour meeting at the November<br>
IETF meeting? I think that would be the best way to come to consensus<br>
on this but obviously only if enough people would plan to actually<br>
attend. So, I&#39;d be interested in who is would attend and any opinions<b=
r>
for or against such a meeting.<br></blockquote><div><br>I&#39;ll be there i=
f there is one.<br><br><br>Cheers,<br>Jacni<br>=A0<br></div><blockquote cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px sol=
id rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">

<br>
Thanks,<br>
Donald<br>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D<br>
=A0Donald E. Eastlake 3rd=A0=A0 +1-508-333-2270 (cell)<br>
=A0155 Beaver Street,=A0Milford, MA 01757 USA<br>
=A0<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Pppext mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext" target=3D"_blank">=
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>

--bcaec50160fbc49edb04acca9617--

--===============2038857404448898969==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Pppext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext

--===============2038857404448898969==--