Re: [Pppext] Future of the PPP WG

William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com> Sat, 10 September 2011 01:08 UTC

Return-Path: <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: pppext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pppext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9525521F85CE for <pppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 18:08:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.467
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.467 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.132, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5jHF94kDFizQ for <pppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 18:08:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gw0-f42.google.com (mail-gw0-f42.google.com [74.125.83.42]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCC1621F85C6 for <pppext@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 18:08:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gwb17 with SMTP id 17so2574533gwb.15 for <pppext@ietf.org>; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 18:10:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1ATF6tjpFt11cOpFiEJSfJGyDYJrpXk3XJ5z61Ejk4M=; b=LJoNaqhO0mtj1Yk4gFpEcqe+GFGrFlPD4dVeXNbDHxxj0dqRDdYYJkC4UaS/tFcK58 brWyWbY4O8rqVZTS6uZqEL0GJ+wLnJGJcBkT9fnbBmexquhGXqM39NcQXdaWs9YJjwBJ +eTzZigOfTb3ZUzceCnGukaNtESlcIUDgoY9c=
Received: by 10.236.178.73 with SMTP id e49mr15938277yhm.60.1315617046876; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 18:10:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Wastrel-3.local (c-68-40-194-239.hsd1.mi.comcast.net [68.40.194.239]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s42sm8404503yhs.0.2011.09.09.18.10.45 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 09 Sep 2011 18:10:46 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4E6AB917.90509@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 21:10:47 -0400
From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.22) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/3.1.14
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: IETF PPP Extensions <pppext@ietf.org>
References: <CAF4+nEF-G1zpRABffyT+fpx=Oc0__u1Yth6oK-1UWLTqEgCRVg@mail.gmail.com> <4E69F98B.2050504@gmail.com> <2E733A2A-4ED6-44FF-A2CE-D57C33F36560@townsley.net> <CAF4+nEFGfsF6xiWdHL+sayTjWwkrpfGau_aTHHkeggcXeBJF_g@mail.gmail.com> <ED33CEDF-7401-4201-86F1-D8E6BC49F27C@townsley.net>
In-Reply-To: <ED33CEDF-7401-4201-86F1-D8E6BC49F27C@townsley.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Pppext] Future of the PPP WG
X-BeenThere: pppext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: PPP Extensions <pppext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pppext>, <mailto:pppext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pppext>
List-Post: <mailto:pppext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pppext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext>, <mailto:pppext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 01:08:51 -0000

On 9/9/11 7:51 PM, Mark Townsley wrote:
>
> OK, I stand corrected. I was thinking of the charter that had existed before and during my tenure as AD:
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/pppext/charters?item=charter-pppext-2006-07-03.txt
>
> It seems a few sentences were added in 2009, in particular the unfortunate text that says:
>
> "The group is not expected to create new specifications, and if a need for such work comes up, a recharter is required."
>
> This looks like Jari's handiwork, he just loves to recharter WGs ;-)
>
> With this new sentence, yes, it looks like pppext is unnecessarily hamstrung from advancing enhancements that the group does *not* think are of questionable value.
>
Ha!  You nailed it in one!!!

# Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 15:35:24 +0300
# From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
# Subject: [Pppext] Charter update
#

And my response was:

$ Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 17:53:22 -0400
$ From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
$ Subject: Re: [Pppext] Charter update
$
$ Jari Arkko wrote:
$ > The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP, RFC 1661) is a mature protocol with a
$ > large number of subprotocols, encapsulations and other extensions. The
$ > PPPEXT working exists to provide a forum for asking clarifications
$ > about the existing specifications and to defend against enhancements
$ > of questionable value. The group is not expected to create new
$ > specifications, and if a need for such work comes up, a recharter is
$ > required. The group may, however, advance existing specifications
$ > to the next level in the standards track, if a need for that comes up.
$ >
$ Seems OK, other than "not expected to create new specifications".
$
$ Recent security research has rather obsoleted the ancient authentication
$ and encryption specifications. Every once in awhile, I've been thinking
$ about writing some replacement transforms....
$
$ How about changing to: "... new specifications, other than replacing or
$ updating authentication, confidentiality, and improved key management
$ specifications. If a need for other additional work arises, ...."
$
$ Another thing that group probably ought to discuss is formally retiring
$ some of the ancient Proposed work as Historic.
$
$ Admittedly, we gave up on advancing things like IPCP, as IPv4 was supposedly
$ ready to be replaced (for the past 15 years). Ha!
$