2.3 Internet Area

Internet Area Report

The Internet Area includes 17 WGs, 10 of which met. In addition, a BOF was held on the topic of IP over VBI (Vertical Blanking Interval).


Simon Wegerif adopted this summary from the minutes report.

The VBI BOF was held on Tuesday, August 12 and was chaired by Dan Zigmond <djz@corp.webtv.net>. Approximately 45 people attended the BOF. The purpose of this BOF was to judge interest in the subject of sending IP format data in a standard way over the analog TV Vertical Blanking Interval (VBI) and to determine whether an IETF Working Group should be formed to progress the work.

Dan Zigmond gave an overview of the Vertical Blanking Interval and discussed issues related to using the VBI to carry IP data.

After discussions about the technology, the discussion centered on how to proceed with regards to this work inside the IETF. It was proposed that the scope of the IETF activity should initially be restricted to the layers between IP and the existing data link levels (NABTS / WST), rather than dealing with unicast / multicast issues. The scope needs to be defined as well as the domains of the computer and broadcasting industries should be made clear. It was agreed that the relevant broadcasting standards groups should be informed of this activity and their participation welcomed.

It was the consensus of the group that a charter be put together with a justification for why this activity should proceed inside the IETF. This will be done before the next IETF meeting. A decision would then be made on whether to form a WG.

100VG-AnyLAN MIB (vgmib)

Did not meet.

AToM MIB (atommib)

Did not meet.

DNS IXFR, Notification, and Dynamic Update (dnsind)

Adapted from report by Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>

DNSIND met Tuesday 12 Aug for one hour.

Conformance testing (a precondition for promotion to Draft Standard) of DynUpd, Notify, and IXFR are finally getting initial momentum.

· Draft-ietf-dnsind-tsig-01.txt ready for WG lasts call.
· Draft-ietf-dnsind-ncache-04.txt not ready for prime time, close but bad language problems.

· Draft-eastlake-kitchen-sink-02.txt small issues are resolvable, but not clear that this is advisable on the whole.
· Draft-ietf-dnsind-test-tlds-01.txt a chance to check ISO and other name standards and then ready for WG last call.
· Draft-watson-dns-error-00.txt generally thought quite well. Needs some revision, then ready for WG last call.
· A way to permit new RR types to use compression is needed. Volunteer identified to produce draft.
· Draft-eastlake-local-names-00.txt (which reserves some top-level domain names for local testing purposes) was mildly controversial but Donald will do a bit more work and then re-gauge the sense of the WG on what to do with the document.

Note from the Internet ADs: The ADs are in discussion with the WG chair on the future of this WG. It seems clear that some sort of ongoing WG is needed to deal with DNS issues that continually surface. However, a new or re-chartered (i.e., appropriately scoped) WG appears desirable. In addition, there are some folks that feel that work on the DNS should more or less stop with future effort directed at a DNSng. A BOF is planned for DC to consider the question of whether a DNSng is needed.

DS1/DS3 MIB (trunkmib)

Did not meet.

Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc)

Adapted from report by Ralph Droms <droms@bucknell.edu>

The DHC WG met twice, once for DHCPv4, once for DHCPv6.

DHCPv6: Ralph Droms reviewed recent developments in the progress of the DHCPv6 docs in the standards process. In particular, to ensure broad review of the documents, Droms requested external reviews from Erik Nordmark and Matt Crawford. Those reviews, which were well-written and insightful and for which the WG is *very* grateful, pointed out several design issues that need to be resolved as well as editorial changes to improve and correct the documents. The authors of the DHCPv6 documents, Jim Bound and Charlie Perkins, led the remainder of the WG meeting, in which the design issues were discussed. Bound and Perkins will take the results of that discussion as further input in continuing to revise the DHCPv6 documents.

DHVPv4: The WG discussed a number of different proposed options. The WG agreed that the chair should issue WG last calls on:

· An option for FQDNs in DHCP options draft-ietf-dhc-fqdn-opt-03.txt
· An Extension to the DHCP Option Codes draft-ietf-dhc-options-opt127-03.txt
· Netware/IP Domain Name and Information draft-ietf-dhc-netware-options-00.txt
· DHCP Options for Novell Directory Services draft-provan-dhcp-options-dir-serv-01.txt

Discussion of authentication and inter-server protocols continued in this meeting. Olafur Gudmundsson and Baiju Patel agreed to develop a comparison of their two proposals.

Michael Patrick's "agent options" (draft-ietf-dhc-agent-options-02.txt) proposal was *not* recommended for WG last call.

Frame Relay Service MIB (frnetmib)

Did not meet.

IP Over IEEE 1394 (ip1394)

Adapted from report by Myron Hattig <mhattig@pacifier.com>
Munich IETF IP over 1394 WG Summary

This was the initial meeting for this WG (an interim meeting was held a few weeks earlier). The WG made use of three sessions. IP Unicast, IP Broadcast, and ARP items discussed were: - Link Fragmentation & LLC/SNAP - Remove or retain EUI-64 in ARP format - Have fixed offset between bus resets - Discuss Editorial comments regarding current draft. (n - Remove or retain bridges as part of WG focus. - Discuss Pull Model - Uses of ARP and IP Broadcast Channel - Multiple vs Single FIFO - MTU size - Pre-assigned Channel number - 16 bit signature in Link Frag header Summary of changes to draft - Fixed Offset: Add comment regarding sending ARP response and values in the ARP response fields. - Bridges: Change draft to reflect bridges are not within the current scope of the IP over 1394 WG. - 16 bit Link Frag Header Signature: Spec will state that Node ID is best choice for 16 bit signature in link fragment header, but will not mandate NodeID. Spec will mandate any other selection process to have a reasonable assurance of uniqueness. Next items to be discussed on reflector - Link frag & encapsulation header format - IP manager election process - Address editorial comments about current draft - Pull Model - IP Multicast - Integrated Services There were presentations of IP multicast over 1394 and ISSL 1394. Discussed having an Interim Meeting. No date or agenda set.

IP Payload Compression Protocol (ippcp)

Adapted from report by Naganand Doraswamy <naganand@BayNetworks.COM>

The IP Payload Compression Protocol WG met for the first time at Munich. There were a few basic questions that need to be answered. The main issues were:

1) Should we support session-based compression? (answer: yes)
2) Should the compression be stateful or stateless? (answer: stateless)
3) Should we negotiate it as a protocol or attribute (answer: protocol)

Discussion then centered on the specific drafts that had been produced for the meeting. During the discussion, most open issues were resolve. The next step is to modify the architecture document to incorporate all the changes that were discussed in the working group and open it up for discussion. Once the working group agrees on the changes, we can move forward for last call.

IP over Cable Data Network (ipcdn)

Mike St. Johns adopts this summary from the report.

IP over Cable Data Networks met for one 2-hour session at Munich.

Rich Woundy of Media One updated the group on MCNS standards progress and also discussed the relationship of cable modems to IP integrated services ala RSVP.

Gerry White presented an outline for an IP over MCNS document and agreed to be the author for such document.

Mark Laubach presented his IP over 802.14 document and the working group agreed to adopt it as a WG effort.

Mike St. Johns held a short discussion on the relationship of Multicast management too large public LANs such as cable data systems and ADSL systems.

The final hour of the meeting was used as an editing session for the RF and Cable Modem MIBs.

IPNG (ipngwg)

The IPng group met for two sessions and discussed numerous issues. Among the highlights: The WG discussed advancing various documents up the standards track. Documents that were updated to reflect the change in the size/format of the interface identifier (i.e., EUI-64 format) will be recycled at Proposed. A handful of other documents, including the base IPv6 spec have not changed significantly and the process to advance them to Draft Standard will be started.

The loosely defined (and unimplemented) 4-bit Priority field in the base IPv6 header was discussed at length. The WG decided to steal 4 more bits from the Flow Label field to reserve 8-bits for a class/priority. The definition and semantics of the field will be pulled out of the base spec and defined in a separate document.

The WG is at the point where the default minimum MTU of 576 is about to become pretty much impossible to change. The WG decided that it would be good to raise the MTU to something larger (e.g., 1300 bytes), so that even with additional headers from tunneling, IPSec, etc., packets would not require fragmentation over links with MTUs of 1500 bytes.

IPv6 MIB (ipv6mib)

Did not meet.

ISDN MIB (isdnmib)

Did not meet.

Interfaces MIB (ifmib)

Did not meet. The WG is currently working on promoting RFC 1573 (interfaces MIB) to draft. A replacement draft is done, has been through IETF Last Call, but there is still some question as to whether all the features in the updated draft have been implemented by multiple vendors.

Internetworking Over NBMA (ion)

Adapted from report by "Andrew G. Malis" <amalis@alpo.casc.com>

ION met for two sessions, 195 attendees signed the roster.

First session:

Jim Luciani spoke on SCSP for MARS. The group accepted Jim's presentation, and work on the document will continue.

Grenville Armitage spoke on three topics, IPv6 over NBMA, the status of some of his other documents, and his new ion security draft. Draft-armitage-ion-mars-nbma-02.txt is complete and Grenville has asked for a WG last call for Informational. This will happen shortly.

Juha Heinanen spoke on intra-area IP unicast among routers over legacy ATM. The chairs will discuss with the area directors whether this should be submitted as an informational or proposed standard RFC.

Rob Coltun spoke on the OSPF ARA option. Suggestions for improvement were made, and will be further discussed on the list.

Shantigram Jagannath discussed end-to-end traffic management issues in IP/ATM internetworks. This was provided for the working group's general information. They will revise their draft based upon comments and future work, and the working group chairs will discuss with the area directors whether this fits within the working group charter as a working group document.

Second session:

Mike Davison presented ILMI-based server discovery. These drafts have been adopted by the WG as a work item.

David Breitgand presented IMSS, IP multicast shortcuts.

George Swallow announced that following the end of this talk the chairs and area directors will be updating the working group's charter to update the goals and milestones, and to determine the scope of future work, especially with regards to multicasting and shortcuts. No further action will be taken on this or other multicast shortcut proposals by the working group until the charter revision is complete.

Norihiro Ishikawa presented IP Multicast Routing over ATM. The WG agreed to take no further action on this draft.

Jun Ogawa and Yao-Min Chen presented Responder Initiated Shortcut Path (RISP). No further action will be taken on the draft.

Note from Internet ADs: The ADs are in discussion with the WG chairs on the future of the WG. The WG/IESG expects to have finished work on NHRP and SCSP by the next IETF, which will clear out most of the work items in the ION charter. Some additional (and possible) work items remain, but they appear to be relatively straightforward and uncontentious. We expect the focus of the WG to be slimmed down in the next few months.


Met for one session.

Adapted from report by Danny Cohen <Cohen@myri.com>

Encouraged by the success of the first interoperability tests the group decided to focus on finalizing both the EEP document and the RRP documents. In addition, the group decided to coordinate its resource-locating handling with the activities of the SRVLOC working group.

The WG considered and approved an updated set of Goals & Milestones. The new milestones include delivery to the IESG (by the spring 1998 IETF) of the base set of pktway documents.

Note from Internet ADs: The WG has missed delivering on its Goals & Milestones. A new set of Milestones has been agreed to and the WG has been directed to focus on those deliverables. The WG has also demonstrated a burst of recent activity.

Point-to-Point Protocol Extensions (pppext)

Adapted from report by Karl Fox <karl@ascend.com>

The ISSLOW IP compression draft will be reworked slightly to simplify and then go back to one more draft. I objected to the large number of 8-bit PPP protocol numbers requested, based on a misunderstanding on my part of how many had been allocated so far.

The L2TP over non-IPSEC networks was discussed. The title is now different from what was originally commissioned, being for "non-IPSEC" rather than "non-IP" networks--I don't know how this will fly with the security directorate. The draft still has a way to go.

PPP LCP Callback, PPP LCP Self-describing Padding, and PPP LCP Extensions (the LCP Identity and Time-Remaining packets) are all at Draft Standard and have been around long enough to go to Standard. I will collect interoperability experience reports and move those qualifying forward.

Much time was spent discussing L2TP in both meetings as well as in a smaller group Tuesday evening. The authorship of the -05 draft was moved from Andy Valencia to Bill Palter and Mark Townsley to help ensure that the new draft is available soon enough that people can code to it for the bakeoff at Compuserve in four weeks. I believe that all or almost all outstanding issues were amicably resolved, something we have not been able to do in many months.

PPP over AAL5 and PPP over FUNI are tracking similar documents in the ADSL forum, which are in turn tracking them. One person is author of both documents, and is making sure that interoperability between the two (as well as RFC 1973) is maximized. Another draft coming.

A nice gentleman from the NSA presented a set of new drafts describing several link-layer authentication, key management and encryption protocols, at least one of which uses a classified algorithm. He said that it is possible that the classified algorithm may be declassified, offering an unpatented alternative to Diffie-Hellman, and allowing the protocol to enter the standards track rather than being relegated to Informational.

This was a good meeting. The room was large enough, the sound system worked well, and a bunch of smart people made good comments.

Service Location Protocol (svrloc)

Adapted from report by Erik Arthur Guttman guttman@CS.Stanford.EDU

The agenda of the SVRLOC WG went as scheduled. We discussed the status of the existing drafts and the need to recycle SLP at proposed. During the subsequent charter discussion, it was agreed that the current work could be brought to closure by the next IETF meeting.

A new and promising work item was discussed: A proposal for Wide Area Service Location. The discussion strayed some as the proposal contained material on billing, authentication, congestion control and more complex query processing than SLP allows. Other question raising topics included using wide area service location for finding arbitrary services, like pizzerias, etc. On close examination however, there is a core to the proposal that is detachable from these 'diverting' elements. In general, the approach would be a very good match to SLP provided that:

· Multicast wide service registration is acceptable, in some form to the multicast community, for the purposes of discovery.
· The changes required of SLP are minor enough to not place large burdens on SAs (which need to be lightweight.)

In separate meetings, it was decided that this work item would not be added to the SVRLOC charter, but rather be presented at a BOF next IETF so that community thought could be solicited and interest gauged (potentially resulting in the formation of a new working group.)

Note from Internet ADs: The WG expects to deliver a set of documents to the IESG by December. At that point, the WG will have delivered its core set of documents, and it may become appropriate to limit the WGs activities while experience from deployments is obtained. SLP is primarily oriented toward SLP within a site rather than on for Internet-wide service discovery. There appears to be some interest in investigating the latter topic. However, we expect to host a BOF first to get a sense of just what problem needs to be solved, where the work should be done, how to scope it, etc.

Previous PageNext Page