Re: [Pppext] Future of the PPP WG

Jacni Qin <jacniq@gmail.com> Tue, 13 September 2011 03:51 UTC

Return-Path: <jacniq@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 51EED21F8B6C for <pppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:51:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.434
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.434 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.164, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 t7Mvi07CDSKe for <pppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:51:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vw0-f54.google.com (mail-vw0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B249E21F8B21 for <pppext@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:51:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vws18 with SMTP id 18so267648vws.27 for <pppext@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:53:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=+Yr/Z4FcrT6zvkbFkYyhlWH6nVrglALTJ3mwARAM7KE=; b=nKf5QjFuLD4IxRtIZ3b1KNoTOJK/n3ig8XhsoDJGqn7NAJyklOaO8B+D0GOrNiyPT8 +ELuO8eLnJP0+ZmMGOezEFB6dEYTAYspVlElF+SJgxdqVWv7WnPjzSuEYdAkdz86P3OQ ZHeLXEQIUBDemHiqU287WR8pcdEzf8jkgFKis=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.72.193 with SMTP id f1mr2095151vdv.284.1315886019681; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:53:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.52.187.161 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:53:39 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAF4+nEF-G1zpRABffyT+fpx=Oc0__u1Yth6oK-1UWLTqEgCRVg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF4+nEF-G1zpRABffyT+fpx=Oc0__u1Yth6oK-1UWLTqEgCRVg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 11:53:39 +0800
Message-ID: <CAHmj1WdrzzYNFy5zTC3WQue7HkrNhJOFeZX_fN5fWCxesLAymw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jacni Qin <jacniq@gmail.com>
To: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec50160fbc49edb04acca9617
Cc: IETF PPP Extensions <pppext@ietf.org>
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: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 03:51:42 -0000

Hi Donald,

On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 6:24 AM, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> wrote:

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

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

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


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

I'll be there if there is one.


Cheers,
Jacni


>
> Thanks,
> Donald
> =============================
>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>  155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
>  d3e3e3@gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> Pppext mailing list
> Pppext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext
>