CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_ Reported by Fred Baker/cisco Systems Minutes of the Point-to-Point Protocol Extensions Working Group (PPPEXT) Compression Control Protocol Fred Baker opened the meeting, advising the working group on the status of the issues with Motorola regarding the Compression Control Protocol. On 1 November, Steve Coya, Executive Director of the IETF, advised Fred that ``I received a letter in the mail from Darlene Stockley at Motorola. In it, she states that Motorola will offer licenses on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms. She closes by saying they will have terms available by the end of the year.'' A copy of that letter was sent to Fred as well. On 1 December, Motorola apparently sent a letter to Steve (copying Fred) describing those terms. Neither Steve nor Fred have received it at this point. Fred will advise the working group of the contents of the second letter when he receives it. PPP Banyan Vines Control Protocol Fred, in the absence of it's author (Steve Senum), presented the updated draft of the PPP Banyan Vines Control Protocol (BVCP). This draft is draft-ietf-pppext-vines-01.txt. It formalizes the use of the control and data protocols specified by Assigned Numbers, and three options relating to routing protocol messages and fragmentation. The working group approved advancement to Proposed Standard. PPP XNS IDP Control Protocol Fred, in the absence of it's author (Steve Senum), presented the updated draft of the PPP XNS IDP Control Protocol (XNSCP). This draft is draft-ietf-pppext-xnscp-00.txt. It formalizes the use of the control and data protocols specified by Assigned Numbers, and proposes no options. The working group approved advancement to Proposed Standard. PPP Encryption Control Protocol Gerry Meyer presented the PPP Encryption Control Protocol (ECP). This is draft-ietf-pppext-encryption-00.txt. This protocol is modelled on the CCP, including the use of separate informational documents describing separate encryption procedures. o Negotiation of encryption using PPP - Protects against eavesdropping on that link. - Dependent on the encryption algorithm used. - Care with which any `secrets' are protected. - Protection is not end-to-end (multiple hops). o Main Features - Encryption algorithm negotiated using PPP. - Similar concept to Compression negotiation. - Standard encryption algorithms. - Manufacturer specific encryption algorithms (IEEE 802 OUI). - Algorithm may be different in each direction. - Negotiate above or below multilink (different protocol). - Unlike CCP, Reset and Reset Ack not supported. - If negotiation fails - call is aborted. One change was suggested by Jeff Weiss (Magnalink Telco), to add an encryption reset and acknowledge, for use by non-self-synchronizing encryption procedures. Gerry had been concerned that the procedure might be problematic due to Motorola's compression patents. Jeffrey indicates that he holds a patent that Motorola cites as prior art. This patent specifies a reset/acknowledge procedure. He will give the Executive Director the necessary letter. When Gerry has updated the draft, we will ask for a consensus on the list and send the document to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard. Synchronous Data Compression Consortium The Synchronous Data Compression Consortium made a presentation to the working group at the last IETF meeting, describing its use of PPP between DSUs. It has now largely completed its design and is about to ask TR 30.1 to recommend the use of the procedure. These documents are: o PPP for Data Compression in Data Circuit-Terminating Equipment (DCE) draft-ietf-pppext-dce-compress-00.txt o PPP LZS-DCP Compression Protocol (LZS-DCP) draft-ietf-pppext-lzs-dcp-00.txt o PPP Serial Data Transport Protocol (SDTP) draft-ietf-pppext-sdtp-00.txt There was no representative present to present them. David Patrick of Motorola stood to describe what they are and lead a discussion on them. Several questions were raised concerning technical aspects. The people concerned about them will contact the author and discuss them on the dsu-compress[-request]@paradyne.com list. These will be published as Informational RFCs when complete, due to their status in ANSI. Other Business Discussion then continued with subjects from the floor: the development of IPCP, LQM, Authentication, and AppleTalk. IPCP is being updated by Gurdeep Singh Pall of Microsoft. On 6 December, he advised the chair and the PPP Editor that the document had been posted for anonymous FTP. He is soliciting those inputs before posting an Internet-Draft. LQM, apart from a few typographic errors, appears to have several interoperable implementations and serve its purpose well. Bill Simpson will update it and post a new Internet-Draft. We expect to send this in as a Draft Standard. In the currently widely held security model, exchange of passwords in the clear does not appear wise. Thus, PAP is no longer a recommended procedure. CHAP, however, is still believed to be acceptable for a certain class of problems. Bill will create a new Authentication Internet-Draft which does not have PAP in it. The IESG can declare RFC 1334 ``Historical,'' making PAP a historical procedure, and the new CHAP-only draft will become a Draft Standard when a consensus on the list supports that. The Kerberos and one-time passwords effort (Carrels, Blunk, and Parker) has not to date produced a requirements document. Two companies, however, have deployed incompatible authentication procedures of that type. Brad Parker will update the draft-ietf-pppext-gap-00.txt draft according to deployment experience, and we will publish that, probably as a Proposed Standard. Fred will contact Larry Blunk to determine whether the combined effort is still likely to occur. Brad Parker indicates that he has received no comments on his AppleTalk draft. Working group members are asked to read the draft and comment on it. Craig Fox and Moon are checking with their management concerning PPP-a-thons adjoining the Danvers and Stockholm IETFs. These would be for general protocol testing and testing on ISDN, X.25, etc., respectively. Rachel Willmers of Spider is also trying to organize some testing. This will be discussed further on the list as we determine what facilities are available and what folks are ready to test.