From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Fri Dec 1 08:24:18 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA01495 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 08:24:18 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id EE5ED5DDA8; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 08:23:57 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id D37A45DDAF; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 08:23:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from mumm.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (mumm.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de [134.169.34.190]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23D705DDA8 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 08:23:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from henkell.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (schoenw@henkell [134.169.34.191]) by mumm.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA27123; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 14:23:54 +0100 (MET) Received: from schoenw@localhost by henkell.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.7.6/tubsibr) id OAA01389; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 14:23:54 +0100 Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 14:23:54 +0100 Message-Id: <200012011323.OAA01389@henkell.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: aboba@internaut.com Cc: aaa-wg@merit.edu In-reply-to: Subject: Re: Data modelling proposals and questions References: Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk >>>>> Bernard Aboba writes: Bernard> Some questions about the proposals: Bernard> a. As I understand it, Juergen's proposal provides a language Bernard> within which the existing DIAMETER protocol (and possible Bernard> extensions) could be described. This would enable DIAMETER Bernard> implementations (as well as sniffers and debuggers) to offer Bernard> a more powerful data dictionary. However, the proposal does Bernard> not change the on-the-wire protocol, correct? The proposal provides a formal way to define DIAMETER messages and the data structures contained in DIAMETER messages. The on the wire protocol is not touched (except that the document also proposes to change the set of base AVP types to a minimal set which is aligned with the minimal set of SMIng base types). Bernard> Also, since SMIng is quite powerful, it is capable of Bernard> supporting arbitrarily complex attributes, though the Bernard> proposal does not advocate this. Thus, it would appear to me Bernard> that there are data structures describable within SMIng that Bernard> cannot be described in the proposed language subset, correct? It is hard to say yes or no here. The proposal makes use of a structured AVP (Groups), an idea shamelessly borrowed from Erik Guttman's proposal. Since Groups can be nested, you can build relatively complex things. However, whether this is a good or bad thing to do has much to do with other issues, such as the transport mappings. If we must support UDP, then we have to deal with serious packet length restrictions and thus arbitrarily complex attributes would not work well (and thus it would not be a good idea to define them). Does this answer your questions? /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Technical University Braunschweig Dept. Operating Systems & Computer Networks Phone: +49 531 391 3289 Bueltenweg 74/75, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany Fax: +49 531 391 5936 From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Fri Dec 1 20:21:27 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA12322 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 20:21:27 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 1A4205DDCF; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 20:21:09 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 0AD665DE48; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 20:21:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B096E5DDCF for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 20:21:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ISI.EDU (jet.isi.edu [128.9.160.87]) by boreas.isi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA04401; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 17:21:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200012020121.RAA04401@boreas.isi.edu> To: IETF-Announce: ; Subject: RFC 2989 on Network Access AAA Evaluation Criteria Cc: rfc-ed@ISI.EDU, aaa-wg@merit.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary=NextPart Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 17:21:03 -0800 From: RFC Editor Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk --NextPart A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 2989 Title: Criteria for Evaluating AAA Protocols for Network Access Author(s): B. Aboba, P. Calhoun, S. Glass, T. Hiller, P. McCann, H. Shiino, G. Zorn, G. Dommety, C. Perkins, B. Patil, D. Mitton, S. Manning, M. Beadles, P. Walsh, X. Chen, S. Sivalingham, A. Hameed, M. Munson, S. Jacobs, B. Lim, B. Hirschman, R. Hsu, Y. Xu, E. Campbell, S. Baba, E. Jaques Status: Informational Date: November 2000 Mailbox: bernarda@microsoft.com, pcalhoun@eng.sun.com, steven.glass@sun.com, tom.hiller@lucent.com, mccap@lucent.com, hshiino@lucent.com, gwz@cisco.com, gdommety@cisco.com, charliep@iprg.nokia.com, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com, dmitton@nortelnetworks.com, smanning@nortelnetworks.com, mbeadles@smartpipes.com, walshp@lucent.com, xing.chen@usa.alcatel.com, s.sivalingham@ericsson.com, mmunson@mobilnet.gte.com, sjacobs@gte.com, bklim@lgic.co.kr, qa4053@email.mot.com, rhsu@qualcomm.com, hskoo@sta.samsung.com, mlipfo01@sprintspectrum.com, ed_campbell@3com.com, yxu@watercove.com, sbaba@tari.toshiba.com, ejaques@akamail.com Pages: 29 Characters: 53197 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-aaa-na-reqts-07.txt URL: ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2989.txt This document represents a summary of Authentication, Authorization, Accounting (AAA) protocol requirements for network access. In creating this document, inputs were taken from documents produced by the Network Access Server Requirements Next Generation (NASREQ), Roaming Operations (ROAMOPS), and MOBILEIP working groups, as well as from TIA 45.6. This document summarizes the requirements collected from those sources, separating requirements for authentication, authorization and accounting. Details on the requirements are available in the original documents. This document is a product of the Authentication, Authorization and Accounting Working Group of the IETF. This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST@IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution.echo Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. Joyce K. Reynolds and Sandy Ginoza USC/Information Sciences Institute ... Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant Mail Reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the RFCs. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="RFC-INFO@RFC-EDITOR.ORG" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <001201171752.RFC@RFC-EDITOR.ORG> RETRIEVE: rfc DOC-ID: rfc2989 --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="rfc2989.txt"; site="ftp.isi.edu"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="in-notes" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <001201171752.RFC@RFC-EDITOR.ORG> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Tue Dec 5 13:19:10 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA18538 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 13:19:10 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 75BB15DE1D; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 13:17:18 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 58E265DE1E; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 13:17:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.ipunplugged.com (unknown [195.42.212.161]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECE035DE1D for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 13:17:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from fredrikj ([192.168.4.228]) by localhost.ipunplugged.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA13750; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 19:17:46 +0100 From: "Fredrik Johansson" To: "Mobile IP listan" , "Diameter Listan" , "AAA Listan" Subject: AAA key distribution for Mobile IP Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 19:19:14 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004A_01C05EF0.4155ADF0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_004A_01C05EF0.4155ADF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Can anyone tell me how the temporary session keys generated by a Diameter server will be distributed. The "AAA Registration Keys for Mobile IP" has expired, is it still used, a new version coming soon? Or are there any new extensions that should be used instead? /Fredrik P.S. sorry for the cross posting ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Fredrik Johansson W: +46 (0)8 725 5916 Interactive People Unplugged M: +46 (0)70 786 5035 mailto:fredrik.johansson@ipunplugged.com http://www.ipunplugged.com ------=_NextPart_000_004A_01C05EF0.4155ADF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
 
Can = anyone tell me=20 how the temporary session keys generated by a Diameter server will be=20 distributed. The "AAA Registration Keys for Mobile IP" has expired, is = it still=20 used, a new version coming soon? Or are there any new extensions that = should be=20 used instead?
 
/Fredrik
P.S. = sorry for the=20 cross posting
 
----------------------------------------------------------------= -------------------
Fredrik=20 Johansson          &nbs= p;         W:=20 +46 (0)8 725 5916
Interactive People=20 Unplugged     M: +46 (0)70 786 5035
mailto:fredrik.johansso= n@ipunplugged.com
http://www.ipunplugged.com
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_004A_01C05EF0.4155ADF0-- From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Fri Dec 8 12:14:32 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA19480 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:14:32 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 5B1CA5DD90; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:14:11 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 447105DDAB; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:14:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ftpbox.mot.com (ftpbox.mot.com [129.188.136.101]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 350045DD90 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:14:10 -0500 (EST) Received: [from pobox.mot.com (pobox.mot.com [129.188.137.100]) by ftpbox.mot.com (ftpbox 2.1) with ESMTP id KAA16901 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 10:14:09 -0700 (MST)] Received: [from m-il06-r3.mot.com (m-il06-r3.mot.com [129.188.137.194]) by pobox.mot.com (MOT-pobox 2.0) with ESMTP id KAA01759 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 10:14:09 -0700 (MST)] Received: from [140.101.173.9] by m-il06-r3.mot.com with ESMTP for aaa-wg@merit.edu; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 10:52:12 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by zorglub.crm.mot.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/crm-1.6) id RAA22569 for aaa-wg@merit.edu.DELIVER; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 17:52:15 +0100 (MET) Received: from crm.mot.com (oliverea@nero.crm.mot.com [140.101.173.36]) by zorglub.crm.mot.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/crm-1.6) with ESMTP id RAA22496 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 17:52:14 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <3A3111BD.671D208A@crm.mot.com> Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 17:52:13 +0100 From: Alexis Olivereau Reply-To: Alexis.Olivereau@crm.mot.com Organization: Centre de Recherche de Motorola - Paris X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74C-CRM-4.7_2.2 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: aaa-wg@merit.edu Subject: Diameter opensource implementations Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Hi, Could you please tell me if there already exist opensource Diameter implementations ? I have heard about one from Sun but I am not able to find any info on it... I thank you in advance. Alexis From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Fri Dec 8 16:23:43 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA23504 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 16:23:43 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 6456A5DE2F; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 16:23:26 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 50B825DDC5; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 16:23:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (mercury.Sun.COM [192.9.25.1]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05CED5DDA7 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 16:23:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from engmail4.Eng.Sun.COM ([129.144.134.6]) by mercury.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA19499; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 13:23:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from nasnfs.eng.sun.com (nasnfs.Eng.Sun.COM [10.6.84.20]) by engmail4.Eng.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v1.7) with ESMTP id NAA08487; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 13:23:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from mordor (mordor [129.146.120.122]) by nasnfs.eng.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA26987; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 13:23:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 13:20:05 -0800 (PST) From: Pat Calhoun Reply-To: Pat Calhoun Subject: Re: [diameter] AAA key distribution for Mobile IP To: Fredrik Johansson Cc: Mobile IP listan , Diameter Listan , AAA Listan In-Reply-To: "Your message with ID" Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk > Hi, > > Can anyone tell me how the temporary session keys generated by a Diameter > server will be distributed. The "AAA Registration Keys for Mobile IP" has > expired, is it still used, a new version coming soon? Or are there any new > extensions that should be used instead? > hmmm.... I was not aware that it had expired. Last I hear, the general idea was to do a last call on the document, but I have not heard from the chairs on that particular I-D. Raj, Phil? I can re-submit another version, if need be. PatC From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Fri Dec 8 17:34:27 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA24414 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 17:34:27 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 2D6DB5DDC5; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 17:33:27 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 1CD115DE30; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 17:33:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from mgw-dax2.ext.nokia.com (mgw-dax2.ext.nokia.com [63.78.179.217]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC2835DDC5 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 17:33:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from davir03nok.americas.nokia.com (davir03nok.americas.nokia.com [172.18.242.86]) by mgw-dax2.ext.nokia.com (Switch-2.1.0/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id eB8MY5614658 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 16:34:05 -0600 (CST) Received: from daebh02nok.americas.nokia.com (unverified) by davir03nok.americas.nokia.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 16:33:25 -0600 Received: by daebh02nok with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2652.78) id ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 16:33:24 -0600 Message-ID: <7B5C0390ACE7D211BC9C0008C7EABA2B01A6E67F@daeis07nok> From: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com To: Pat.Calhoun@Eng.Sun.COM, fredrik.johansson@ipunplugged.com Cc: MOBILE-IP@STANDARDS.NORTELNETWORKS.COM, diameter@diameter.org, aaa-wg@merit.edu Subject: RE: [diameter] AAA key distribution for Mobile IP Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 16:29:21 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2652.78) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Pat, I have not really seen a clamoring for this I-D in the WG. So the fact that it has expired and not realy caused any concern makes me believe if there is sufficient WG interest in this I-D. However, please do submit a newer version and we will take it from there. -Basavaraj > > > Hi, > > > > Can anyone tell me how the temporary session keys generated > by a Diameter > > server will be distributed. The "AAA Registration Keys for > Mobile IP" has > > expired, is it still used, a new version coming soon? Or > are there any new > > extensions that should be used instead? > > > hmmm.... I was not aware that it had expired. Last I hear, > the general idea > was to do a last call on the document, but I have not heard > from the chairs on > that particular I-D. > > Raj, Phil? > > I can re-submit another version, if need be. > > PatC > > From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Sat Dec 9 11:22:14 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA05561 for ; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 11:22:14 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 5B8885DDAC; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 11:21:49 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 3DCF95DDA9; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 11:21:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from nt1.rocori.k12.mn.us (nt1.rocori.k12.mn.us [207.229.251.2]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE3415DD91 for ; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 11:21:47 -0500 (EST) From: Mail Sender To: A107369@teleline.es Cc: a1178886.35b5eaa6@aol.com, aa7a373.35b010cc@aol.com, aaa288@home.cam.net.uk, aaa-wg@merit.edu, AADD-Focused-request@maillist.net Subject: Russian Goods and Service from Moscow Reply-To: mailsender@mailsender.ru Date: 09.12.2000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-Id: <20001209162147.DE3415DD91@segue.merit.edu> Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk www.rusgoods.com www.rusgoods.ru ================================================================ We present you the production of the 1-st Moscow Watch Factory "Poljot" (Flying). From the simple mechanical watch of the series 2609 till unique, composite and precise mechanical o'clock - Marine timer . It is unique factory in Russia, which makes mechanical hours with the Swiss quality. Factory, which makes watches for the Russian Air Forces , Russian Naval Forces. All mechanical watch which we offer to you, will be delivered to you directly from the factory. If it isn't in the warehouse of the factory, we will place your order directly at the 1-st Moscow Watch Factory without any middlemans. The submarine "Kursk" had on board mechanical marine hronometr 6MX. =============================================================== The "table" of orders. Here you can to order, to find, to know almost everything, than the Russia is rich, everything that does not contradict Russian Federation laws. Here you can receive or order: The information about any enterprise, firm, organization, or person in Russia The production or any goods of Russian manufactories, and other things if it is possible. =============================================================== www.rusgoods.com www.rusgoods.ru From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Tue Dec 12 00:37:10 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA18262 for ; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:37:09 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id D64EF5DD9E; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:36:50 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id BDAD05DD9F; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:36:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from loveable.com (p51-tnt1.brs.ihug.com.au [203.173.188.51]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with SMTP id 20A315DD9E for ; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:36:48 -0500 (EST) To: aaa-wg@merit.edu From: lovecentral@loveable.com X-Mailer: B2EFD1A.5C679237.91261e142a245fb12625859f66215939 Subject: The Guide To Meeting People Online. Organization: Sara Castleton Message-Id: <20001212053648.20A315DD9E@segue.merit.edu> Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:36:48 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk That special someone is waiting for you! Romance, an intimate encounter, or just friendship, there's someone waiting for you right now. Love Central is the ultimate guide to meeting people online. It's fast, friendly, and absolutely FREE! To receive the Love Central information, simply reply to this email, placing "Love" in the subject field. Take the step now towards finding that special someone. Warm regards, Sara Castleton @ Love Central ************************************************************ We do not support unsolicited emailing. If this email has been received in error please accept our apologies and simply reply to it with "Remove" in the subject field. Your email address will be deleted from the list that we purchased immediately. ************************************************************ From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Wed Dec 13 11:04:02 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA13230 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:04:02 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 1A2695DE20; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:01:18 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 079D45DE1E; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:01:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtp2.cluster.oleane.net (smtp2.cluster.oleane.net [195.25.12.17]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEBAA5DE15 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:01:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from oleane (dyn-1-1-140.Vin.dialup.oleane.fr [195.25.4.140]) by smtp2.cluster.oleane.net with SMTP id eBDG1EM19557 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 17:01:15 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <008001c0651e$372a09a0$8001a8c0@oleane.com> From: "Peter Lewis" To: Subject: IPCN 2001: Call for proposals Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 17:03:18 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_007D_01C06526.96DE7D60" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_007D_01C06526.96DE7D60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Building and designing IP cellular networks is still a challenge and = drain a lot of research and developpement activities by industry and = academic research laboratories. The IP-Based Cellular Networks = conference (IPCN 2001) will provide a state of the art of the current = research and developpement progress and will present an overview of the = current IETF and 3GPP activities in this area.=20 A call for proposals is online at: http://www.upperside.fr/baipcn2001.htm ------=_NextPart_000_007D_01C06526.96DE7D60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Building and designing IP = cellular=20 networks is still a challenge and drain a lot of research and=20 developpement activities by industry and academic research laboratories. = The=20 IP-Based Cellular Networks conference (IPCN 2001) will = provide=20 a state of the art of the current research and developpement progress = and will=20 present an overview of the current IETF and 3GPP = activities in=20 this area.

A call for proposals is online at:
http://www.upperside.fr/b= aipcn2001.htm
------=_NextPart_000_007D_01C06526.96DE7D60-- From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Wed Dec 13 11:40:58 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA13830 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:40:58 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 5F80B5DDF8; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:40:38 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 499465DDC8; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:40:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from roam.psg.com (ietf.207.137.72.106.tx.verio.net [207.137.72.106]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36E2C5DD95 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:40:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from randy by roam.psg.com with local (Exim 3.12 #1) id 146ExL-00051O-00; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 08:40:39 -0800 From: Randy Bush MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Peter Lewis" Cc: Subject: Re: IPCN 2001: Call for proposals References: <008001c0651e$372a09a0$8001a8c0@oleane.com> Message-Id: Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 08:40:39 -0800 Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk > Building and designing IP cellular networks is still a challenge and drain > a lot of research and developpement activities by industry and academic > research laboratories. The IP-Based Cellular Networks conference (IPCN > 2001) will provide a state of the art of the current research and > developpement progress and will present an overview of the current IETF > and 3GPP activities in this area. do not spam working groups with your advertisements. randy, with AD hat on From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Thu Dec 14 13:48:47 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA05364 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 13:48:47 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 781B15DF0B; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 13:32:11 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 2A92B5E3CB; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 13:26:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from fridge.docomo-usa.com (unknown [216.98.102.228]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 153CA5E0E6 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 13:20:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from DCLNTAS1 (dhcp34.docomo-usa.com [172.21.96.34]) by fridge.docomo-usa.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3495397402 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:22:39 -0800 (PST) From: "Alexander Hagen" To: Subject: Choice of Data Model SMI vs XML vs. UML Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:18:27 -0800 Message-ID: <000c01c065fa$41e48aa0$226015ac@DCLNTAS1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk I beleive this is an extremely important decision. And it seems to me the three systems should be integrated. UML (Unified Modeling Language) has excellent software tools available today, and is the culmination of the synthesis of many different modeling tools. Rational Software of course makes the most popular set of these tools. It seems to me that SMI should act as a module within UML, as UML presently supports JAVA, C++, ACTIVEX, CORBA, DCOM,etc. XML is allready supported by UML. By constructing a UML model one can output XML code. Why is this important ? If all of the RFCs and Standards had models in the UML the speed of development and interoperability would be greatly boosted for all vendors. Therefore I pose the question : And forgive my ignorance SMI people: It appears that there is no tool with the robustness of The UML available for SMI. Cannot then SMI be developed as a module within the UML ? Sincerely, Alexander Hagen Alexander Hagen Executive Research Engineer DoCoMo Communications Laboratories USA, Inc. (DoCoMo USA Labs) 181 Metro Drive, Suite 300, San Jose, CA 95110, USA TEL :+1-408-573-1050 (Main) FAX : +1-408-573-1090 (Main) TEL: +1-408-451-4706 (Direct) E-mail: ahagen@dcl.docomo-usa.com Web: From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Sat Dec 16 12:03:57 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA04352 for ; Sat, 16 Dec 2000 12:03:57 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id D470C5DDA8; Sat, 16 Dec 2000 12:01:02 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id BBEC45DD9D; Sat, 16 Dec 2000 12:01:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from franklin.cisco.com (franklin.cisco.com [171.70.156.17]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7E4B5DD95 for ; Sat, 16 Dec 2000 12:01:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from gwzpc (sj-dial-4-4.cisco.com [171.68.181.133]) by franklin.cisco.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17190)/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with SMTP id IAA11126; Sat, 16 Dec 2000 08:57:58 -0800 (PST) Reply-To: From: "Glen Zorn" To: "C. de Laat" Cc: , "Bernard Aboba" , "David Mitton" , "AAA WG" Subject: RE: Next interim meeting proposal Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 08:58:44 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Next interim meeting proposalSince the SLS Workshop conflicts with the RIPE meeting (22-26 Jan, also in Amsterdam), I would prefer that the interim meeting take place _after_ the Workshop, say 29 Jan, and possibly 30 Jan. BTW, the IETF AAA WG is also considering an interim meeting in late Jan/early Feb, so it might be possible to coordinate w/them to meet in Amsterdam the same week, thus killing 3 birds w/one stone... -----Original Message----- From: owner-aaaarch@fokus.gmd.de [mailto:owner-aaaarch@fokus.gmd.de]On Behalf Of C. de Laat Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 12:04 AM To: aaaarch@fokus.gmd.de Subject: Next interim meeting proposal Hi, We propose to do an interim meeting in Utrecht or Amsterdam just before the IST-Tequila workshop on "Internet Design for SLS Delivery" as noted in the mail below. Since that meeting is on thursday and fridy I would like to propose to have a meeting on the wednesday jan 24th and if needed also on tuesday jan 23th. Please mail me your ideas about this. Best regards, Cees. Subject: TEQUILA WORKSHOP INTRODUCTION Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 05:00:36 +0100 From: Georg Carle Reply-To: carle@fokus.gmd.de To: "John R. Vollbrecht" Dear John, now I found the web page with the announcement of the workshop organized by the Tequila project, one of the co-organizers of the SLS-BOF. The workshop takes place on 25/26 January in Amsterdam, Netherlands. Maybe it is suitable for aligning the next AAAARCH meeting with it. Best regards, http://www.ist-tequila.org/workshop2001/ -- Georg Carle E-mail: carle@fokus.gmd.de GMD FOKUS Tel.: +49-30 3463 7149 Kaiserin-Augusta-Allee 31 Fax: +49-30 3463 8149 D-10589 Berlin, Germany http://www.fokus.gmd.de/usr/carle/ Workshop on Internet Design for SLS Delivery From Service Level Specification to Per Hop Behaviour 25 - 26 January 2001 Tulip Inn Tropen, Amsterdam, The Netherlands The IST-TEQUILA project is organising a workshop on Quality of Service in IP networks and Internet Design for SLS delivery. This workshop will be held at Amsterdam on 25-26 January 2001. Workshop Abstract The workshop focuses on two (related) topics: a.. Service Level Specifications (SLS) - Modelling and Monitoring Customer Demands b.. Traffic Engineering (TE) and Management - Meeting the Customer Demands SLS and TE are key aspects for the deployment of value-added IP service offerings over the Internet. Since these IP services are likely to be provided over the whole Internet, their corresponding QoS will be based upon a set of technical parameters that both customers and services providers will have to agree upon. Such agreements, and especially the negotiations preceding them, will be greatly simplified in the presence of an unambiguous set of (technical) SLS parameters. After signing the agreements and specifying the SLSs, it is further the task of the service provider to meet the customer demands through network management and traffic engineering. The customer expects certain performance from the network, but the operator also attempts to satisfy these expectations in a cost-effective manner. Therefore traffic engineering is a basic tool for the operator to accommodate as many as possible of the traffic requests by using optimally the available network resources. Workshop Program, Registration and Venue The preliminary program is now available. You can register online or download forms for you to print, in PDF and plain-text format. More details about the program and further speakers will be available soon on http://www.ist-tequila.org/workshop2001/. For e-mail communication regarding the Workshop, please contact workshop2001@ist-tequila.org. Background on the TEQUILA project The European project TEQUILA (IST-1999-11253) stands for Traffic Engineering for Quality of Service in the Internet, at Large Scale. TEQUILA's main objective is to study, specify, implement and validate service definition and Traffic Engineering tools for the Internet. The TEQUILA system should provide both quantitative and qualitative service guarantees through planning, dimensioning and dynamic control of traffic management techniques based on DiffServ. The project addresses the following technical areas: (a) Specification of static and dynamic, intra- and inter-domain SLSs (Service Level Specification). (b) Protocols and mechanisms for negotiating, monitoring and enforcing SLSs. (c) Intra- and inter-domain traffic engineering schemes to ensure that the network can cope with the contracted SLSs - within domains, and in the Internet at large. More information is available at http://www.ist-tequila.org/ SLS-related standardisation efforts in the IETF Members of the TEQUILA project introduced a first Internet Draft (SLS - contents, parameters and semantics) on the SLS topic in June 2000. A second version of this draft and a proposal for a Service Level Usage and Specification Framework has been produced. More information on SLS-related standardisation efforts can be found in http://www.ist-tequila.org/sls.html. These drafts together with two other proposals of AT&T and the IST-AQUILA project are currently discussed on a public mailing list: sls@ist-tequila.org To subscribe to the list send an email to majordomo@ist-tequila.org with the sentence: subscribe sls@ist-tequila.org in the body and nothing in the subject line. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maintained by TERENA. Contact workshop2001@ist-tequila.org -- _________________________________________________________________________ dr.ir. C.Th.A.M. de Laat, Faculty of Physics and Astronomy, Utrecht University, Princetonplein 5, NL-3584CC Utrecht, The Netherlands. Tel: (31)30-2534585 , mobile: 06-51566438 , Fax:(31)30-2537555 web: http://www.phys.uu.nl/~delaat , mail: c.t.a.m.delaat@phys.uu.nl From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Tue Dec 19 14:12:09 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA29587 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:12:09 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id AEAA45DE15; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:09:13 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 198E55DEF4; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:09:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from patan.sun.com (patan.Sun.COM [192.18.98.43]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91CC85DE6E for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:08:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from purol.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.9.11]) by patan.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA03848; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 11:07:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from onion.east.sun.com (onion [129.148.174.110]) by purol.East.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v1.7) with SMTP id OAA02942; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:07:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:07:31 -0500 (EST) From: Steven Glass - Solaris Software Reply-To: Steven Glass - Solaris Software Subject: Connectathon 2001 To: nobody@sun.com Cc: diameter@diameter.org, aaa-wg@merit.edu Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk A quick announcement/reminder that the "early-bird" attendance discount is about to expire for Connectathon 2001, being held in San Jose from March 1st to March 8th (load-in February 28th, or whenever you get there, load-out by 4pm March 9th)! Registration for non-profit organizations (NPOs) and universities is free, but you must be registered to test! Many technology implementations will be interoperability tested, including Diameter, and SCTP. These test suites are still being developed (so please suggest your testing needs). There will also be networking-related technology presentations, and talks. See www.connectathon.org for all details, or contact: Diameter details: Steven Glass Pat Calhoun SCTP details: Steven Glass Jon Wood The early discount expires December 31st, 2000. The drop-deadline is February 7th. See on-line registration form for other pricing information. Cheers, Steve From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Wed Dec 20 11:24:47 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA16530 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 11:24:46 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 0620F5DD99; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 11:24:27 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id E84565DDD2; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 11:24:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from gate.internaut.com (unknown [64.38.134.108]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A4745DD99 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 11:24:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from e1kj2 (kidneybean [64.38.134.109]) by gate.internaut.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id eBKGN4C26157; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 08:23:04 -0800 From: "Bernard Aboba" To: Cc: "Dmitton@Nortelnetworks. Com" Subject: Presentations and minutes Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 08:14:02 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk If you did a presentation or took minutes at the AAA WG meetings at IETF 49, please forward this to dave and myself. Thanks, and happy holidays! From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Wed Dec 20 13:44:10 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA19064 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:44:10 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 10DA25DDEA; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:43:49 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id F12585DDC9; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:43:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from gate.internaut.com (unknown [64.38.134.108]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 501115DDA5 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:43:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from e1kj2 (kidneybean [64.38.134.109]) by gate.internaut.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id eBKIgKC01300 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 10:42:26 -0800 From: "Bernard Aboba" To: Subject: DISCUSSION REQUESTED: ADIF, Batching, M bit Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 10:32:58 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk At IETF 49, we discussed a number of issues, and I'd like to verify that there is consensus on these points on the mailing list. If you disagree with the conclusions below, please speak up: 1. Remove application layer batching support from DIAMETER. Via use of the Nagle algorithm, DIAMETER can still support transport layer batching, and thus it was felt that it was not necessary to support application layer batching as well. 2. Remove ADIF support from DIAMETER. Since ADIF does not support nested attributes, we would have to modify it to work with DIAMETER. There was considerably more interest in just using AVPs, so it appears that this work is not necessary. 3. Keep the Mandatory (M) bit. From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Wed Dec 20 13:49:04 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA19116 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:49:04 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 406B35DE0E; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:47:00 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 2F58B5DDC9; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:47:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from gate.internaut.com (unknown [64.38.134.108]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7791C5DDBB for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:46:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from e1kj2 (kidneybean [64.38.134.109]) by gate.internaut.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id eBKIjbC01577 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 10:45:37 -0800 From: "Bernard Aboba" To: Subject: AAA WG Last Call on draft-ietf-aaa-issues-04.txt Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 10:36:15 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk This is AAA WG last call on draft-ietf-aaa-issues-04.txt, before sending it on to the IESG for publication as an Informational RFC. If you have comments on the document, please post these to the AAA WG or to the authors by January 14, 2001. The document is available as: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-aaa-issues-04.txt From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Wed Dec 20 13:52:46 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA19177 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:52:46 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 5CF3A5DE0F; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:52:29 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 4B8D35DE0C; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:52:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from gate.internaut.com (unknown [64.38.134.108]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F4C25DDBB for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:52:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from e1kj2 (kidneybean [64.38.134.109]) by gate.internaut.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id eBKIp6C01839 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 10:51:06 -0800 From: "Bernard Aboba" To: Subject: DISCUSSION REQUESTED: draft-ietf-aaa-solutions-00.txt Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 10:41:44 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk At IETF 49, Pat Calhoun presented draft-ietf-aaa-solutions-00.txt. With the exception of three areas (transport, security and data modelling), we did not have a great deal of comment on the solutions draft. As a result, I'd like to request that AAA WG members re-read the solutions draft, and comment on whether it is adequate aside from the three areas above. If we do indeed have consensus on the rest of the solutions draft, then one possible approach would be to break off the discussion of transport, security and data modelling into separate drafts, move the rest of the solutions draft to WG last call and make the indicated changes to the DIAMETER spec. Opinions? From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Wed Dec 20 13:58:11 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA19294 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:58:11 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 431865DE0C; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:57:51 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 32BB15DDBB; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:57:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from gate.internaut.com (unknown [64.38.134.108]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 706725DDA5 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:57:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from e1kj2 (kidneybean [64.38.134.109]) by gate.internaut.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id eBKIuSC02097 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 10:56:28 -0800 From: "Bernard Aboba" To: "Aaa-Wg@Merit. Edu" Subject: Possible interim meeting date and place Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 10:47:06 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk In order to make progress on the big three outstanding issues (transport, security, data modelling), we are considering holding an interim meeting of the AAA WG. One possible location and date for the interim meeting is February 7, 2001 in San Diego at the Catamaran Resort Hotel. This date and place was suggested because it is just before the ISOC NDSS Conference at the same location (see http://www.isoc.org/ndss01/) so that it it would appear possible to get a number of security experts (including Steve Bellovin) to attend. How do people feel about this? From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Wed Dec 20 17:34:20 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA23002 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:34:20 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 1FB095DE28; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:31:10 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 039AF5DE2D; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:31:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from franklin.cisco.com (franklin.cisco.com [171.70.156.17]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 193635DE28 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:31:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from gwzpc (sj-dial-4-55.cisco.com [171.68.181.184]) by franklin.cisco.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17190)/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with SMTP id OAA25658; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 14:29:18 -0800 (PST) Reply-To: From: "Glen Zorn" To: "Bernard Aboba" , "Aaa-Wg@Merit. Edu" Subject: RE: Possible interim meeting date and place Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 14:29:08 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Bernard Aboba [mailto:aboba@internaut.com] writes: > In order to make progress on the big three outstanding > issues (transport, security, data modelling), we are > considering holding an interim meeting of the AAA WG. > > One possible location and date for the interim meeting is > February 7, 2001 in San Diego at the Catamaran Resort > Hotel. This date and place was suggested because it is just > before the ISOC NDSS Conference at the same location > (see http://www.isoc.org/ndss01/) so that it it would > appear possible to get a number of security experts > (including Steve Bellovin) to attend. Possible, certainly, but how likely? Has Bellovin evinced any interest inb AAA? > > How do people feel about this? Another (perhaps more interesting) possibility might be Amsterdam the week before; this might nicely coincide with both the AAAArch RG interim meeting and the IST-Tequila workshop on "Internet Design for SLS Delivery", to be in thesame city at roughlythe same time... > > From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Wed Dec 20 17:56:58 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA23213 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:56:58 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id EEF435DDD3; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:56:38 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id DE3A75DDE8; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:56:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from cisco.com (nsm-mail2.cisco.com [171.71.236.25]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F3F55DDD3 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:56:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from jtrostle-nt2 (dhcp-128-107-141-211.cisco.com [128.107.141.211]) by cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA14077; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 14:52:38 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <4.1.20001220145428.00b99aa0@nsm-mail2> X-Sender: jtrostle@nsm-mail2 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 14:55:07 -0800 To: "Bernard Aboba" , "Aaa-Wg@Merit. Edu" From: Jonathan Trostle Subject: Re: Possible interim meeting date and place In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk I will be in San Diego at that time. Jonathan At 10:47 AM 12/20/00 -0800, Bernard Aboba wrote: >In order to make progress on the big three outstanding >issues (transport, security, data modelling), we are >considering holding an interim meeting of the AAA WG. > >One possible location and date for the interim meeting is >February 7, 2001 in San Diego at the Catamaran Resort >Hotel. This date and place was suggested because it is just >before the ISOC NDSS Conference at the same location >(see http://www.isoc.org/ndss01/) so that it it would >appear possible to get a number of security experts >(including Steve Bellovin) to attend. > >How do people feel about this? > From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Thu Dec 21 04:04:08 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA00722 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:04:07 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id EFF445DE23; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:03:34 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id C7A5A5DE29; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:03:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from max.phys.uu.nl (max.phys.uu.nl [131.211.32.73]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE4495DE23 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:03:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.254.7] (hst3788.phys.uu.nl [131.211.37.88]) by max.phys.uu.nl (8.9.3/8.9.3/hjm) with ESMTP id KAA28483; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:02:11 +0100 (MET) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: delaat@imap1.phys.uu.nl (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:02:04 +0100 To: , "Bernard Aboba" , "Aaa-Wg@Merit. Edu" , aaaarch@fokus.gmd.de From: "C. de Laat" Subject: RE: Possible interim meeting date and place Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Hi Bernard, It was suggested to me and on the lists that combining or placing (in time and place) together the aaaarch RG and aaa wg interim meetings would be an interesting option. Reasons for combining: - interest and cross fertilisation of each others work http://www.aaaarch.org - IST-Tequila workshop on "Internet Design for SLS Delivery", 25-26 jan http://www.ist-tequila.org/workshop2001/ - ripe 38 meeting 22-26 jan http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/current/ripe-38/index.html reasons for not combining: - seems to me that most of the aaa-wg interim participants would be USA-west coast people, while aaaarch has a significant European group - if somebody would really want to go to all the proposed meetings, it would need a schedule which would span two weeks to avoid conflicts, and people might get tired of an overflow of meetings - currently the interests of the aaaarch RG and the aaa-wg differ in that the research group looks into the architecture of multidomain aaa, relationships and investigates distributed policy evaluation. The aaa-wg is in the process of nailing down an aaa-transport protocol and as such the activities are mostly complementary. If the aaa-wg wants to do the interim meeting in Europe, Holland, I am willing to host it on the University of Utrecht. I am going to host the aaaarch rg meeting here. Best regards, Cees. At 14:29 -0800 12/20/00, Glen Zorn wrote: >Bernard Aboba [mailto:aboba@internaut.com] writes: > >> In order to make progress on the big three outstanding >> issues (transport, security, data modelling), we are >> considering holding an interim meeting of the AAA WG. >> >> One possible location and date for the interim meeting is >> February 7, 2001 in San Diego at the Catamaran Resort >> Hotel. This date and place was suggested because it is just >> before the ISOC NDSS Conference at the same location > > (see http://www.isoc.org/ndss01/) so that it it would >> appear possible to get a number of security experts >> (including Steve Bellovin) to attend. > >Possible, certainly, but how likely? Has Bellovin evinced any interest inb >AAA? > >> >> How do people feel about this? > >Another (perhaps more interesting) possibility might be Amsterdam the week >before; this might nicely coincide with both the AAAArch RG interim meeting >and the IST-Tequila workshop on "Internet Design for SLS Delivery", to be in >thesame city at roughlythe same time... > >> >> -- _________________________________________________________________________ dr.ir. C.Th.A.M. de Laat, Faculty of Physics and Astronomy, Utrecht University, Princetonplein 5, NL-3584CC Utrecht, The Netherlands. Tel: (31)30-2534585 , mobile: 06-51566438 , Fax:(31)30-2537555 web: http://www.phys.uu.nl/~delaat , mail: c.t.a.m.delaat@phys.uu.nl From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Thu Dec 21 04:13:18 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA00831 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:13:18 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id CC0315DD91; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:12:58 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id BC9485DE29; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:12:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from mumm.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (mumm.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de [134.169.34.190]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 505D15DD91 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:12:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from henkell.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (schoenw@henkell [134.169.34.191]) by mumm.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA10945; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:12:55 +0100 (MET) Received: from schoenw@localhost by henkell.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.7.6/tubsibr) id KAA15060; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:12:55 +0100 Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:12:55 +0100 Message-Id: <200012210912.KAA15060@henkell.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: aboba@internaut.com Cc: aaa-wg@merit.edu In-reply-to: Subject: Re: Possible interim meeting date and place References: Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk >>>>> Bernard Aboba writes: Bernard> In order to make progress on the big three outstanding issues Bernard> (transport, security, data modelling), we are considering Bernard> holding an interim meeting of the AAA WG. Bernard> One possible location and date for the interim meeting is Bernard> February 7, 2001 in San Diego at the Catamaran Resort Bernard> Hotel. This date and place was suggested because it is just Bernard> before the ISOC NDSS Conference at the same location (see Bernard> http://www.isoc.org/ndss01/) so that it it would appear Bernard> possible to get a number of security experts (including Steve Bernard> Bellovin) to attend. I will not be able to be in San Diego at that time. I could however make it to Amsterdam or Utrecht. ;-) /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Technical University Braunschweig Dept. Operating Systems & Computer Networks Phone: +49 531 391 3289 Bueltenweg 74/75, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany Fax: +49 531 391 5936 From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Thu Dec 21 04:14:56 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA00841 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:14:56 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 80EB45DE29; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:14:39 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 71CD45DE2D; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:14:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from mumm.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (mumm.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de [134.169.34.190]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC5665DE29 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:14:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from henkell.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (schoenw@henkell [134.169.34.191]) by mumm.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA10990; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:14:37 +0100 (MET) Received: from schoenw@localhost by henkell.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.7.6/tubsibr) id KAA15074; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:14:36 +0100 Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:14:36 +0100 Message-Id: <200012210914.KAA15074@henkell.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: aboba@internaut.com Cc: aaa-wg@merit.edu In-reply-to: Subject: Re: DISCUSSION REQUESTED: ADIF, Batching, M bit References: Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk >>>>> Bernard Aboba writes: Bernard> At IETF 49, we discussed a number of issues, and I'd like to Bernard> verify that there is consensus on these points on the mailing Bernard> list. If you disagree with the conclusions below, please Bernard> speak up: [...] Bernard> 3. Keep the Mandatory (M) bit. It really depends on what the precise semantics of this bit are. It is hard to say I agree or disagree without knowing the precise wordings. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Technical University Braunschweig Dept. Operating Systems & Computer Networks Phone: +49 531 391 3289 Bueltenweg 74/75, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany Fax: +49 531 391 5936 From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Thu Dec 21 04:51:49 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA01094 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:51:49 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 768845DDC9; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:51:31 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 51DA25DE2D; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:51:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from patan.sun.com (patan.Sun.COM [192.18.98.43]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB15A5DDC9 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:51:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from efra05-home.Germany.Sun.COM ([129.157.43.5]) by patan.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA16458; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 01:51:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from vayne (muc-isdn-1 [129.157.164.101]) by efra05-home.Germany.Sun.COM (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8/ENSMAIL,v2.0) with SMTP id KAA11826; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:51:26 +0100 (MET) Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 11:01:44 +0100 (MET) From: Erik Guttman Reply-To: Erik Guttman Subject: RE: Possible interim meeting date and place To: Bernard Aboba Cc: aaa-wg@merit.edu Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Bernard, I support holding the interim meeting in Amsterdam. Erik ._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._. E r i k G u t t m a n SHORT msgs: 01728655497@d2-message.de Sr Staff Engineer, Sun Microsystems Email: erik.guttman@sun.com Eichhoelzelstr. 7, 74915 Waibstadt Germany Phone: +49 172 865 5497 From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Thu Dec 21 07:48:16 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA03089 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 07:48:16 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 3B70E5DE3B; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 07:46:13 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 2BCC15DE39; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 07:46:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail-blue.research.att.com (mail-blue.research.att.com [135.207.30.102]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28DB75DE37 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 07:46:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from postal.research.att.com (postal.research.att.com [135.207.23.30]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02D4E4CE01; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 07:46:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from smb.research.att.com (postal.research.att.com [135.207.23.30]) by postal.research.att.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07082; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 07:45:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from smb.research.att.com (localhost.research.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by smb.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C737E35DC2; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 07:45:58 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with version: MH 6.8.3 #1[UCI] From: "Steven M. Bellovin" To: gwz@cisco.com Cc: "Bernard Aboba" , "Aaa-Wg@Merit. Edu" Subject: Re: Possible interim meeting date and place Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 07:45:57 -0500 Message-Id: <20001221124558.C737E35DC2@smb.research.att.com> Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk In message , "Glen Zorn" writes: >Bernard Aboba [mailto:aboba@internaut.com] writes: > >> In order to make progress on the big three outstanding >> issues (transport, security, data modelling), we are >> considering holding an interim meeting of the AAA WG. >> >> One possible location and date for the interim meeting is >> February 7, 2001 in San Diego at the Catamaran Resort >> Hotel. This date and place was suggested because it is just >> before the ISOC NDSS Conference at the same location >> (see http://www.isoc.org/ndss01/) so that it it would >> appear possible to get a number of security experts >> (including Steve Bellovin) to attend. > >Possible, certainly, but how likely? Has Bellovin evinced any interest inb >AAA? I was at last year's interim meeting... > > > --Steve Bellovin From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Thu Dec 21 07:50:10 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA03113 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 07:50:10 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 302B45DE39; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 07:46:41 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 15E145DE43; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 07:46:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from rip.psg.com (rip.psg.com [147.28.0.39]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E844D5DE39 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 07:46:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from randy by rip.psg.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14954m-00013M-00; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:44:04 -0800 From: Randy Bush MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: aboba@internaut.com Cc: aaa-wg@merit.edu Subject: Re: Possible interim meeting date and place References: <200012210912.KAA15060@henkell.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de> Message-Id: Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 04:44:04 -0800 Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk i have a good chance at arranging my schedule to be on the left coast on 01.02.07. randy From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Thu Dec 21 08:19:09 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA03544 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 08:19:09 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 4585C5DE47; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 08:17:07 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 35F7D5DE3E; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 08:17:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from rip.psg.com (rip.psg.com [147.28.0.39]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33D365DE37 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 08:17:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from randy by rip.psg.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 1495ai-0001J8-00; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 05:17:04 -0800 From: Randy Bush MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Steven M. Bellovin" Cc: aaa-wg@merit.edu Subject: Re: Possible interim meeting date and place References: <20001221124558.C737E35DC2@smb.research.att.com> Message-Id: Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 05:17:04 -0800 Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk > I was at last year's interim meeting... and i, for one, thought you made a non-trivial contribution. so consider this as begging. randy From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Fri Dec 22 07:29:43 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA20823 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 07:29:43 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 9CA665DD93; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 07:29:21 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 7CCA75DD9D; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 07:29:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 095625DD93 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 07:29:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA29119; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 07:29:18 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200012221229.HAA29119@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: aaa-wg@merit.edu From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-To: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-aaa-proxies-01.txt Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 07:29:17 -0500 Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Authentication, Authorization and Accounting Working Group of the IETF. Title : Proxy Nodes in AAA Configurations Author(s) : D. Mitton Filename : draft-ietf-aaa-proxies-01.txt Pages : 12 Date : 21-Dec-00 This document describes the issues and gives examples of typical proxy systems in AAA applications. The purpose of this effort is to set the reference space evaluating and improving AAA protocols, such as the Diameter protocol, currently being reviewed in this WG. This interim version begins to address solutions to some of the issues raised earlier. This document will evolve into an explanation of the issues we are concerned with and the recommended solutions. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-aaa-proxies-01.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-aaa-proxies-01.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-aaa-proxies-01.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20001221095101.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-aaa-proxies-01.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-aaa-proxies-01.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20001221095101.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Tue Dec 26 16:48:58 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA04177 for ; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 16:48:57 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id D66005DE18; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 16:48:00 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id BB2C65DDC3; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 16:48:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ctron-dnm.ctron.com (ctron-dnm.cabletron.com [12.25.1.120]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14BA05DE16 for ; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 16:47:54 -0500 (EST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by ctron-dnm.ctron.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id QAA18928; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 16:53:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from roc-mail2.ctron.com(134.141.72.230) by ctron-dnm.ctron.com via smap (4.1) id xma018924; Tue, 26 Dec 00 16:53:08 -0500 Received: from ctron-exc1.ctron.com (ctron-exc1.ctron.com [134.141.77.90]) by roc-mail2.ctron.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05331; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 16:47:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from ctron-exc1.ctron.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ctron-exc1.ctron.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id ZM7PY962; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 16:45:21 -0500 Received: from 134.141.150.5 by ctron-exc1.ctron.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Tue, 26 Dec 2000 16:37:16 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Message-ID: <3A490E8D.71DB68DF@enterasys.com> Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2000 16:33:02 -0500 From: David Harrington Reply-To: dbh@enterasys.com Organization: Enterasys Networks X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexander Hagen Cc: aaa-wg@merit.edu Subject: Re: Choice of Data Model SMI vs XML vs. UML References: <000c01c065fa$41e48aa0$226015ac@DCLNTAS1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Hi Alex, I personally like UML, but I see problems with trying to adopt it for standards development. One problem with trying to standardize on UML is the inability to express UML easily in RFCs, which must be done in ASCII. A second is the cost of good tools. Rational Software has an excellent tool, but it is out of reach pricewise for most people. Typically only large corporations can justify the cost of tools like this. While there are some low cost UML tools available, they do not compare in quality to Rational tools. This would effectively limit standards-development based on UML to only the large corporations, which is not the goal of the IETF. I haven't studied UML closely enough to know the answer to this question, so I'll ask you to comment. Does UML inherently output XML code, or is this a feature of the Rational tools? Just my $.02 dbh Alexander Hagen wrote: > > I beleive this is an extremely important decision. > > And it seems to me the three systems should be integrated. > > UML (Unified Modeling Language) has excellent software tools available > today, and is the culmination of the synthesis of many different modeling > tools. > > Rational Software of course makes the most popular set of these tools. > > It seems to me that SMI should act as a module within UML, as UML presently > supports JAVA, C++, ACTIVEX, CORBA, DCOM,etc. > > XML is allready supported by UML. By constructing a UML model one can output > XML code. > > Why is this important ? > > If all of the RFCs and Standards had models in the UML the speed of > development and interoperability would be greatly boosted for all vendors. > > Therefore I pose the question : > > And forgive my ignorance SMI people: > > It appears that there is no tool with the robustness of The UML available > for SMI. Cannot then SMI be developed as a module within the UML ? > > Sincerely, > > Alexander Hagen > > Alexander Hagen > Executive Research Engineer > DoCoMo Communications Laboratories USA, Inc. (DoCoMo USA Labs) > 181 Metro Drive, Suite 300, San Jose, CA 95110, USA > TEL :+1-408-573-1050 (Main) FAX : +1-408-573-1090 (Main) > TEL: +1-408-451-4706 (Direct) > E-mail: ahagen@dcl.docomo-usa.com > Web: -- --- David Harrington Network Management Standards Architect dbh@enterasys.com Office of the CTO +1 603 337 2614 - voice Enterasys Networks +1 603 332 1524 - fax Rochester NH, USA From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Fri Dec 29 07:54:48 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA22583 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 07:54:48 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 5A31C5DD8E; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 07:54:27 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 3E9235DDAB; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 07:54:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from patan.sun.com (patan.Sun.COM [192.18.98.43]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 491145DD8E for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 07:54:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from efra05-home.Germany.Sun.COM ([129.157.43.5]) by patan.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA22568; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 04:54:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from vayne (muc-isdn-9 [129.157.164.109]) by efra05-home.Germany.Sun.COM (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8/ENSMAIL,v2.0) with SMTP id NAA06087; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 13:54:21 +0100 (MET) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 14:04:43 +0100 (MET) From: Erik Guttman Reply-To: Erik Guttman Subject: Re: Choice of Data Model SMI vs XML vs. UML To: Alexander Hagen Cc: dbh@enterasys.com, aaa-wg@merit.edu In-Reply-To: "Your message with ID" <3A490E8D.71DB68DF@enterasys.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Alex, You wrote: > I beleive this is an extremely important decision. > > And it seems to me the three systems should be integrated. > > UML (Unified Modeling Language) has excellent software tools available > today, and is the culmination of the synthesis of many different modeling > tools. Dave Harrington wrote: > I personally like UML, but I see problems with trying to adopt it for > standards development. > > One problem with trying to standardize on UML is the inability to > express UML easily in RFCs, which must be done in ASCII. I agree with Dave, but the issue is not expressibility, but what we are trying to express. The DIAMETER extensions are really very simple at this point. UML would be 'redundent in its splendor.' We need a *simple* and *clear* solution which we can adopt *quickly.* This may obviate finding a general one-size-fits-all solution for data modelling. Let's be clear: What we are trying to do is solve current, real problems for MIP, NASREQ, ROAMOPS and 3G. All of these have very simple models for bundling a small group of atomic attributes for the purposes of establishing, modifying or deleting a session, maybe doing requesting accounting data, authentication configuration information or authorization resources. We should choose SMIng or XML notation to formally define the attributes used in data exchanges between DIAMETER peers. We do not need a general meta-type language for this purpose, nor could we agree on it before our deadline: For one thing, I believe the technique is so new, we would have insufficient expertise within the WG to perform peer review of the specification now crucially dependent upon correct UML notation. If we cannot agree quickly, then a formal data definition may not be part of the DIAMETER specification as it is not of primary importance to its correctness, featurefulness or interoperation of different implementations. I believe that having the formal definitions will help in each of these areas, but it isn't essential. Erik ._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._. E r i k G u t t m a n SHORT msgs: 01728655497@d2-message.de Sr Staff Engineer, Sun Microsystems Email: erik.guttman@sun.com Eichhoelzelstr. 7, 74915 Waibstadt Germany Phone: +49 172 865 5497 From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Fri Dec 29 09:33:15 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA25497 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 09:33:15 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 2D27E5DDC6; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 09:30:46 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 1CC0B5DDC1; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 09:30:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.60]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 199055DDBE for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 09:30:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from 216-164-251-35.s289.tnt3.atn.pa.dialup.rcn.com ([216.164.251.35] helo=bnatale.acecomm.com) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #5) id 14C0YI-0003fN-00 ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 09:30:39 -0500 Message-Id: <5.0.1.4.2.20001229093211.02400030@plymouth.acec.com> X-Sender: bnatale@plymouth.acec.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.1 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 09:37:42 -0500 To: Erik Guttman From: Bob.Natale@AppliedSNMP.com Subject: Re: Choice of Data Model SMI vs XML vs. UML Cc: aaa-wg@merit.edu In-Reply-To: References: <"Your message with ID" <3A490E8D.71DB68DF@enterasys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk At 12/29/2000:08:04 AM, Erik Guttman wrote: Hi Erik, ><...> >We should choose SMIng or XML notation I would like to suggest that we use XML as a basis for all such info/data modeling efforts going forward. Saying "XML", however, does not (in the more complex cases, at least) solve "the problem" by itself. As we all know, XML (for complex cases, at least) requires efforts at DTD/XSL/etc. layer to be effective -- and that will generally just bring us back to the same point we are currently at in these discussion...but with a common, solid basis for moving forward on the requirements-specific details. Hoping that's not too murky :-), BobN From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Fri Dec 29 10:37:38 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA28709 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:37:38 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 58CDB5DDC1; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:37:19 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 421EF5DDB9; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:37:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from patan.sun.com (patan.Sun.COM [192.18.98.43]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A44DD5DDAB for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:37:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from efra05-home.Germany.Sun.COM ([129.157.43.5]) by patan.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA07240; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 07:37:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from vayne (muc-isdn-20 [129.157.164.120]) by efra05-home.Germany.Sun.COM (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8/ENSMAIL,v2.0) with SMTP id QAA19004; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 16:37:14 +0100 (MET) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 16:47:36 +0100 (MET) From: Erik Guttman Reply-To: Erik Guttman Subject: Re: Choice of Data Model SMI vs XML vs. UML To: Bob.Natale@AppliedSNMP.com Cc: Erik Guttman , aaa-wg@merit.edu In-Reply-To: "Your message with ID" <5.0.1.4.2.20001229093211.02400030@plymouth.acec.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk > At 12/29/2000:08:04 AM, Erik Guttman wrote: > > Hi Erik, > > ><...> > >We should choose SMIng or XML notation > > I would like to suggest that we use XML as a basis for all > such info/data modeling efforts going forward. Saying "XML", > however, does not (in the more complex cases, at least) > solve "the problem" by itself. As we all know, XML (for > complex cases, at least) requires efforts at DTD/XSL/etc. > layer to be effective -- and that will generally just bring > us back to the same point we are currently at in these > discussion...but with a common, solid basis for moving > forward on the requirements-specific details. Bob, I totally agree. draft-ietf-aaa-solutions-01.txt includes both the XML and DTD for DIAMETER base and extended AVPs. The next version will include base and extended Commands and a simple XSL for display. To be fair, I think we should consider the criteria established in draft-ietf-aaa-issues-04.txt: XML proposal SMIng proposal [1] - Is it possible to specify the existing DIAMETER Yes, done Yes, example messages? - Is the formal specification language tied to standards Yes No [2] which are expected to remain stable (that is, not expected to change in the near to medium term)? - It is clear that using groups or lists of primitive data Yes but not Yes but not types will be less efficient too bad. too bad. than a complex data type? [1] The SMIng proposal can be found at http://www.diameter.org/draft-schoenw-sming-diameter-00.txt [2] The SMIng specification can be found at http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-nmrg-sming-04.txt Note Appendix B, open issues. http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/sming-charter.html Note the charter goal: Jun 01 Submit revised I-D for Data Definition Language and Usage document The current goal is to submit DIAMETER to the IESG for advancing on the standards track at or before Apr 01. In my opinion we should select the XML solution since it is simple, and adequate. But the most important factor, which we agreed to in advance, is that we can do something which can move forward QUICKLY in the standards process. Since SMIng is not yet standard, I don't think it is presently an option. We simply can't hold up DIAMETER any longer by making it's process contingent upon other standardization efforts. Erik ._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._. E r i k G u t t m a n SHORT msgs: 01728655497@d2-message.de Sr Staff Engineer, Sun Microsystems Email: erik.guttman@sun.com Eichhoelzelstr. 7, 74915 Waibstadt Germany Phone: +49 172 865 5497 From owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Fri Dec 29 11:56:50 2000 Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by nic.merit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA03220 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 11:56:49 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 7B1D75DDB9; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 11:56:29 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: aaa-wg-outgoing@merit.edu Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 64B865DDD3; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 11:56:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from sapphire.int.ipverse.com (w067.z208037018.sjc-ca.dsl.cnc.net [208.37.18.67]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C2175DDB9 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 11:56:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from matt.ipverse.com (lsanca1-ar5-208-248.dsl.gtei.net [4.33.208.248]) by sapphire.int.ipverse.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id ZV8K8AQ6; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 08:56:27 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20001229085403.02041530@pop3.ipverse.com> X-Sender: matt@ipverse.com@pop3.ipverse.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 08:56:31 -0800 To: Erik Guttman From: Matt Holdrege Subject: Re: Choice of Data Model SMI vs XML vs. UML Cc: aaa-wg@merit.edu In-Reply-To: References: <"Your message with ID" <5.0.1.4.2.20001229093211.02400030@plymouth.acec.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-aaa-bof@merit.edu Precedence: bulk I support this choice and applaud the significant work you've done to provide DTD's, etc for DIAMETER. XML is very widely used these days and we will be able to reach the largest group of people with it. Of course XML can easily be translated into most any other representation to suit others. At 07:47 AM 12/29/2000, Erik Guttman wrote: > > At 12/29/2000:08:04 AM, Erik Guttman wrote: > > > > Hi Erik, > > > > ><...> > > >We should choose SMIng or XML notation > > > > I would like to suggest that we use XML as a basis for all > > such info/data modeling efforts going forward. Saying "XML", > > however, does not (in the more complex cases, at least) > > solve "the problem" by itself. As we all know, XML (for > > complex cases, at least) requires efforts at DTD/XSL/etc. > > layer to be effective -- and that will generally just bring > > us back to the same point we are currently at in these > > discussion...but with a common, solid basis for moving > > forward on the requirements-specific details. > >Bob, > >I totally agree. draft-ietf-aaa-solutions-01.txt includes >both the XML and DTD for DIAMETER base and extended AVPs. >The next version will include base and extended Commands >and a simple XSL for display. > >To be fair, I think we should consider the criteria established >in draft-ietf-aaa-issues-04.txt: > > XML proposal SMIng proposal [1] > > - Is it possible to specify > the existing DIAMETER Yes, done Yes, example > messages? > > - Is the formal specification > language tied to standards Yes No [2] > which are expected to remain > stable (that is, not expected > to change in the near to > medium term)? > > - It is clear that using groups > or lists of primitive data Yes but not Yes but not > types will be less efficient too bad. too bad. > than a complex data type? > >[1] The SMIng proposal can be found at > > http://www.diameter.org/draft-schoenw-sming-diameter-00.txt > >[2] The SMIng specification can be found at > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-nmrg-sming-04.txt > > Note Appendix B, open issues. > > http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/sming-charter.html > > Note the charter goal: > > Jun 01 Submit revised I-D for Data Definition Language > and Usage document > > The current goal is to submit DIAMETER to the IESG for advancing > on the standards track at or before Apr 01. > >In my opinion we should select the XML solution since it is simple, >and adequate. But the most important factor, which we agreed to >in advance, is that we can do something which can move forward QUICKLY >in the standards process. Since SMIng is not yet standard, I don't >think it is presently an option. We simply can't hold up DIAMETER any >longer by making it's process contingent upon other standardization >efforts. > >Erik > >._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._. >E r i k G u t t m a n SHORT msgs: 01728655497@d2-message.de >Sr Staff Engineer, Sun Microsystems Email: erik.guttman@sun.com >Eichhoelzelstr. 7, 74915 Waibstadt Germany Phone: +49 172 865 5497