Re: [Pppext] Advancing PPP RFCs to Standard, updating Security

Donald Eastlake <> Wed, 15 May 2013 06:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21DCD21F8FB6 for <>; Tue, 14 May 2013 23:59:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.6
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qF5hZXeVUV9g for <>; Tue, 14 May 2013 23:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::241]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B6B621F8F9E for <>; Tue, 14 May 2013 23:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id v19so393977obq.0 for <>; Tue, 14 May 2013 23:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:content-type; bh=OXIcdp1NgQqZIwwoEKk/TGbFrlbpETqJWvNPBHAZ350=; b=K8IyEo7iFnqm+g5UTvcydlC6P82ckvYF9wH8wcm6WgTie8G094R34sTqfugF03TNec oN/OyVtFc6he69t4fAmBYmvB4Tn2anueGIS6CrLB+grBQJw5pFbEAB1HMswfP4D8L5JV Sa9Ue7zXFiOtEslwm2DkcIyA98SKsjmwsvep+q5KLdfRZWBR41yjInCVpFi34U4iqA3T jP7vHpblvQ0JBLNOFKaX+QMZUw02Or4oVnGQUTN/r2NMbhrZmg2+V5x4zC3XV9YIM9XH qZvQ6ugdUSiVvyefc272sIrqGmyd2/r5qt5SE72Zimjcj8Vn+MJo0wdaL/cVFVcIE2xm CztA==
X-Received: by with SMTP id x5mr18354324oei.110.1368601181014; Tue, 14 May 2013 23:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Tue, 14 May 2013 23:59:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
From: Donald Eastlake <>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 02:59:20 -0400
Message-ID: <>
To: IETF PPP Extensions <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [Pppext] Advancing PPP RFCs to Standard, updating Security
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: PPP Extensions <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 06:59:42 -0000


Thanks for the feedback thus far on security. Further feedback welcome.

I continue to be inclined against having a WG meeting in Berlin.

I may have overstated our AD's interest in advancing PPP standards,
Brian is perhaps closer to neutral on the idea.

 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA

On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 6:01 AM, Donald Eastlake <> wrote:
> Hi,
> Our AD is interested in a plan to upgrade appropriate PPP standards
> track RFCs to full Standard. A change in state can, under the right
> circumstances, be done without a new RFC.
> I think it would be appropriate, as I have suggested before, to review
> the PPP security RFCs with a view, in each case, to moving to Historic
> those which don't meet modern security standards or to obsolete them
> with a new version which does... The later would require a Charter
> change.
> To quote from the existing PPPEXT Charter: "The group may, however,
> advance existing specifications to the next level in the standards
> track, if a need for that comes up. Similarly, the group may classify
> existing specifications as Historic where this is appropriate."
> I'd be interested in any comments. If there is any desire for a brief
> meeting in Berlin to discuss this sort of thing, this would be a good
> time to request it. (I just noticed that the session request tool has
> an option to request a 1/2 hour meeting which I never noticed before.
> While WGs have had very short meetings, I can't recall one scheduled
> for less than 1 hour...) I suspect such a meeting at the next IETF
> Meeting in Berlin is not necessary...
> Thanks,
> Donald [PPPEXT Chair]
> =============================
>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>  155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA