From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Tue Oct 8 09:11:23 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA10782 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:11:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 0A10E91281; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:13:12 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id B774D91285; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:13:11 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9BDC91281 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:13:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 1686F5E058; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:13:10 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from kff (dhcp93127046.columbus.rr.com [24.93.127.46]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F16F5E057 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:13:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] by kff (ArGoSoft Mail Server Freeware, Version 1.8 (1.8.1.9)); Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:12:56 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021008091056.03660470@pop-server.columbus.rr.com> X-Sender: karlfox@pop-server.columbus.rr.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2002 09:12:50 -0400 To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu From: Karl Fox Subject: Re: Implementation Survey for LCP MIB (RFC 1471) In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.2.20020912134307.0378c260@pop-server.columbus.rr.c om> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu Second request--please complete this survey; I have two responses, but I don't yet have a complete enough mapping of the features to advance the RFC. Thanks, Karl At 09:24 PM 9/12/02 -0400, Karl Fox wrote: >Thanks to Mike MacFaden for developing this survey, >and my apologies to him for letting it sit on the shelf for so long. > >Thanks also to Bernard Aboba from whom I lifted most >of the introductory text. > > LCP MIB Implementation Survey > >Please fill this out and return it to karlfox@columbus.rr.com by October 27, >2002. > >For the LCP MIB (RFC 1471) to advance to Draft Standard, every feature must >have at least two independent implementations, or must be cut from the >draft. Please read these directions carefully and email your answers to me >directly, not to the list. > >I only need a reply to this if your implementation is INDEPENDENT, that is, >not based on another implementation. If you started out once upon a time >with another code base and eventually replaced all the code with fresh code, >that counts as independent. If you did your implementation from scratch, >better yet. > >Please provide contact information and fill out the Company, Product and >Version fields following their colons, and mark the features with a Y or N >*before* the feature, and keep the spelling and order exactly as they are >here (so I can automate processing the results). Lines starting with __ and >blank lines should not be marked. Lines starting with a # take a numeric or >other non-binary response; if you have a number to respond with, put your >number before the # sign. > >Y means you support that feature in your implementation NOW, N means you do >not. No fair saying that you'll be adding it later; it has to be in your >implementation that's already done and is being used somewhere, although >beta or experimental software counts as in use, as long as its actually >running. > >If you make different kinds of devices but they use the same LCP MIB >implementation, you only need to send me an entry for one. > >Thank you, > >Karl Fox >PPPEXT Working Group Chair > >---------------------------------------- > >__ LCP MIB Implementation Survey > >Contact name: >Contact email address: >Contact phone number: >Company name: >Product Name: >Product Version: > >__ Tables Supported >pppLinkStatusTable supported >pppLinkConfigTable supported read-write >pppLinkConfigTable supported, but read-only >pppLqrTable supported >pppLqrConfigTable supported read-write >pppLqrConfigTable supported, but read-only >pppLqrExtnsTable supported > >__ IF-MIB Table behavior >For any PPP rows created in the PPP-LCP-MIB do you populate the ifTable >__ with ifEntries of ifType ppp(23)? > ># If you answered N to the previous question, what does your agent return to >__ a get of pppLinkStatusPhysicalIndex? From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Tue Oct 8 09:12:48 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA10902 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:12:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id B9BC691285; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:14:29 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 8340291286; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:14:29 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 877DE91285 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:14:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 7756F5DEDA; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:14:28 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from kff (dhcp93127046.columbus.rr.com [24.93.127.46]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 112055DE1A for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:14:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] by kff (ArGoSoft Mail Server Freeware, Version 1.8 (1.8.1.9)); Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:14:15 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021008091342.03664920@pop-server.columbus.rr.com> X-Sender: karlfox@pop-server.columbus.rr.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2002 09:14:11 -0400 To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu From: Karl Fox Subject: Re: Implementation Survey for PPP Security MIB (RFC 1472) In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.2.20020912141322.03b14d90@pop-server.columbus.rr.c om> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu Second request--please complete this survey so that we can advance the RFC. Thanks, Karl At 09:26 PM 9/12/02 -0400, Karl Fox wrote: >Thanks to Mike MacFaden for developing this survey, >and my apologies to him for letting it sit on the shelf for so long. > >Thanks also to Bernard Aboba from whom I lifted most >of the introductory text. > > PPP Security MIB Implementation Survey > >Please fill this out and return it to karlfox@columbus.rr.com by October 27, >2002. > >For the PPP SEC MIB (RFC 1472) to advance to Draft Standard, every feature >must have at least two independent implementations, or must be cut from the >draft. Please read these directions carefully and email your answers to me >directly, not to the list. > >I only need a reply to this if your implementation is INDEPENDENT, that is, >not based on another implementation. If you started out once upon a time >with another code base and eventually replaced all the code with fresh code, >that counts as independent. If you did your implementation from scratch, >better yet. > >Please provide contact information and fill out the Company, Product and >Version fields following their colons, and mark the features with a Y or N >*before* the feature, and keep the spelling and order exactly as they are >here (so I can automate processing the results). Lines starting with __ and >blank lines should not be marked. Lines starting with a # take a numeric or >other non-binary response; if you have a number to respond with, put your >number before the # sign. > >Y means you support that feature in your implementation NOW, N means you do >not. No fair saying that you'll be adding it later; it has to be in your >implementation that's already done and is being used somewhere, although >beta or experimental software counts as in use, as long as its actually >running. > >If you make different kinds of devices but they use the same PPP Security MIB >implementation, you only need to send me an entry for one. > >Thank you, > >Karl Fox >PPPEXT Working Group Chair > >---------------------------------------- > >__ PPP Security MIB Implementation Survey > >Contact name: >Contact email address: >Contact phone number: >Company name: >Product Name: >Product Version: > >__ Tables Supported >pppSecurityConfigTable supported read-write >pppSecurityConfigTable supported, but read-only >pppSecuritySecretsTable supported read-write >pppSecuritySecretsTable supported, but read-only > >__ Which OIDs are supported for pppSecuritySecretsProtocol? List them. ># OID 1 ># OID 2 ># OID 3 From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Tue Oct 8 09:12:51 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA10917 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:12:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 9B10A91286; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:14:52 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id ECD7691288; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:14:51 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D7149128B for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:14:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 8020F5E053; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:14:48 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from kff (dhcp93127046.columbus.rr.com [24.93.127.46]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38DFC5E068 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:14:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] by kff (ArGoSoft Mail Server Freeware, Version 1.8 (1.8.1.9)); Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:14:35 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021008091413.03664030@pop-server.columbus.rr.com> X-Sender: karlfox@pop-server.columbus.rr.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2002 09:14:22 -0400 To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu From: Karl Fox Subject: Re: Implementation Survey for IP NCP MIB (RFC 1473) In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.2.20020912141315.03b13de0@pop-server.columbus.rr.c om> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu Second request--please complete this survey so that we can advance the RFC. Thanks, Karl At 09:32 PM 9/12/02 -0400, Karl Fox wrote: >Thanks to Mike MacFaden for developing this survey, >and my apologies to him for letting it sit on the shelf for so long. > >Thanks also to Bernard Aboba from whom I lifted most >of the introductory text. > > IP NCP MIB Implementation Survey > >Please fill this out and return it to karlfox@columbus.rr.com by October 27, >2002. > >For the IP NCP MIB (RFC 1473) to advance to Draft Standard, every feature >must have at least two independent implementations, or must be cut from the >draft. Please read these directions carefully and email your answers to me >directly, not to the list. > >I only need a reply to this if your implementation is INDEPENDENT, that is, >not based on another implementation. If you started out once upon a time >with another code base and eventually replaced all the code with fresh code, >that counts as independent. If you did your implementation from scratch, >better yet. > >Please provide contact information and fill out the Company, Product and >Version fields following their colons, and mark the features with a Y or N >*before* the feature, and keep the spelling and order exactly as they are >here (so I can automate processing the results). Lines starting with __ and >blank lines should not be marked. Lines starting with a # take a numeric or >other non-binary response; if you have a number to respond with, put your >number before the # sign. > >Y means you support that feature in your implementation NOW, N means you do >not. No fair saying that you'll be adding it later; it has to be in your >implementation that's already done and is being used somewhere, although >beta or experimental software counts as in use, as long as its actually >running. > >If you make different kinds of devices but they use the same IP NCP MIB >implementation, you only need to send me an entry for one. > >Thank you, > >Karl Fox >PPPEXT Working Group Chair > >---------------------------------------- > >__ IP NCP MIB Implementation Survey > >Contact name: >Contact email address: >Contact phone number: >Company name: >Product Name: >Product Version: > >__ Tables Supported >pppIpTable supported >pppIpConfigTable supported read-write >pppIpConfigTable supported, but read-only > ># What value is returned for pppIpLocalMaxSlotId when >__ pppIpLocalToRemoteCompressionProtocol is vj-tcp(2)? > ># What value is returned for pppIpLocalMaxSlotId when >__ pppIpRemoteToLocalCompressionProtocol is vj-tcp(2)? > ># What value is returned when both of the above are vj-tcp(2)? > ># What value is returned when none of the above are vj-tcp(2) From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Tue Oct 22 11:24:21 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA21790 for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:24:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 9427591230; Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:26:21 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 5FF5391250; Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:26:21 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6444B91230 for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:26:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 514A25DDF0; Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:26:20 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com (e34.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.132]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE7E55E013 for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:26:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from westrelay03.boulder.ibm.com (westrelay03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.194.24]) by e34.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g9MFQG5Q035890; Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:26:17 -0400 Received: from rotala.raleigh.ibm.com (rotala.raleigh.ibm.com [9.27.12.14]) by westrelay03.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.3/NCO/VER6.4) with ESMTP id g9MFQGlJ204038; Tue, 22 Oct 2002 09:26:16 -0600 Received: from rotala.raleigh.ibm.com (narten@localhost) by rotala.raleigh.ibm.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9MFNZR31118; Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:23:35 -0400 Message-Id: <200210221523.g9MFNZR31118@rotala.raleigh.ibm.com> To: Karl Fox Cc: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Subject: request to publish: draft-heath-ppp-v44-02.txt Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:23:35 -0400 From: Thomas Narten Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu The IESG has been asked to publish: PPP V.44 Compression Protocol draft-heath-ppp-v44-02.txt as an informational document. Have folks in the WG had a chance to review this? Any opinions (positive or negative)? Thomas From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Wed Oct 23 07:38:01 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA14291 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 07:38:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 08A1D91269; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 07:39:55 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id BC2F59126A; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 07:39:54 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48A8391269 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 07:39:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 3292A5DDEF; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 07:39:53 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B90895DD8C for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 07:39:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA14216; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 07:37:34 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200210231137.HAA14216@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: ietf-ppp@merit.edu From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-To: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pppext-rfc2284bis-07.txt Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 07:37:33 -0400 Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Point-to-Point Protocol Extensions Working Group of the IETF. Title : Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) Author(s) : L. Blunk, J. Vollbrecht, B. Aboba Filename : draft-ietf-pppext-rfc2284bis-07.txt Pages : 33 Date : 2002-10-22 This document defines the Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP), an authentication protocol which supports multiple authentication mechanisms. EAP typically runs directly over the link layer without requiring IP and therefore includes its own support for in-order delivery and retransmission. Fragmentation is not supported within EAP itself; however, individual EAP methods may support this. While EAP was originally developed for use with PPP, it is also now in use with IEEE 802. This document obsoletes RFC 2284. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pppext-rfc2284bis-07.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. 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-pppext-rfc2284bis-07.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-pppext-rfc2284bis-07.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: <2002-10-22143718.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pppext-rfc2284bis-07.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-pppext-rfc2284bis-07.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2002-10-22143718.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Thu Oct 24 07:35:33 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA02367 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 07:35:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 90A2F91210; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 07:37:34 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 5242E91233; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 07:37:34 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DC0C91210 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 07:37:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 0BE1E5DE99; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 07:37:33 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C20D5DDED for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 07:37:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA02284; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 07:35:13 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200210241135.HAA02284@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: ietf-ppp@merit.edu From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-To: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-01.txt Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 07:35:12 -0400 Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Point-to-Point Protocol Extensions Working Group of the IETF. Title : PPP IPV6 Control Protocol Extensions for DNS Server Addresses Author(s) : T. Hiller, G. Zorn Filename : draft-ietf-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-01.txt Pages : 7 Date : 2002-10-23 The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) provides a standard method for transporting multi-protocol datagrams over point-to-point links. PPP defines an extensible Link Control Protocol and a family of Network Control Protocols (NCPs) for establishing and configuring different network-layer protocols. This document extends the NCP for establishing and configuring Version 6 of the Internet Protocol (IPV6) over PPP, defining the negotiation of primary and secondary Domain Name System (DNS) server IPV6 addresses. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-01.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. 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-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-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-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-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: <2002-10-23133526.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-01.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-01.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2002-10-23133526.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Thu Oct 24 12:34:53 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15034 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 12:34:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id EB84C912CF; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 12:34:48 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id BACDF912D0; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 12:34:47 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BFEA912CF for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 12:34:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 24FC35DEB6; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 12:34:45 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from internaut.com (unknown [64.38.134.99]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EC185DEB1 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 12:34:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (aboba@localhost) by internaut.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g9OFWPM05276 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 08:32:25 -0700 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 08:32:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Bernard Aboba To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-01.txt In-Reply-To: <200210241135.HAA02284@ietf.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu Does IPv6 really need yet another way of discovering DNS servers? We've got at least 4 different mechanisms for this now (and maybe I've forgotten a few). Seems to me that sometimes "less is more". On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > This draft is a work item of the Point-to-Point Protocol Extensions Working Group of the IETF. > > Title : PPP IPV6 Control Protocol Extensions for DNS Server > Addresses > Author(s) : T. Hiller, G. Zorn > Filename : draft-ietf-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-01.txt > Pages : 7 > Date : 2002-10-23 From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Thu Oct 24 21:47:09 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA29756 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:47:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 400C29120C; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:49:04 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 0DF7891217; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:49:03 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 399CD9120C for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:47:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 1839A5DEB9; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:47:40 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from mail-out1.apple.com (mail-out1.apple.com [17.254.0.52]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBFAE5DEB5 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:47:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailgate2.apple.com (A17-129-100-225.apple.com [17.129.100.225]) by mail-out1.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g9P1ldw16273 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 18:47:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scv3.apple.com (scv3.apple.com) by mailgate2.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with ESMTP id ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 18:47:25 -0700 Received: from apple.com (lubet1.apple.com [17.202.40.146]) by scv3.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g9P1lPK23473; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 18:47:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 18:47:53 -0700 Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-01.txt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v546) Cc: ietf-ppp@merit.edu To: Bernard Aboba From: Vincent Lubet In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.546) Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In my opinion this is likely the method of choice for for low end PPP solutions because this does not require a DHCP server (or a server for the 3 other solutions) to vent the DNS Server addresses. Vincent Lubet On Thursday, October 24, 2002, at 08:32 AM, Bernard Aboba wrote: > Does IPv6 really need yet another way of discovering DNS servers? We've > got at least 4 different mechanisms for this now (and maybe I've > forgotten > a few). > > Seems to me that sometimes "less is more". > > On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >> This draft is a work item of the Point-to-Point Protocol Extensions >> Working Group of the IETF. >> >> Title : PPP IPV6 Control Protocol Extensions for DNS Server >> Addresses >> Author(s) : T. Hiller, G. Zorn >> Filename : draft-ietf-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-01.txt >> Pages : 7 >> Date : 2002-10-23 > From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Thu Oct 24 22:08:56 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA00214 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 22:08:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 670C091217; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 22:10:46 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 36ECB912F8; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 22:10:46 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1871691217 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 22:10:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 034C35DE20; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 22:10:45 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from wetware.wetware.com (wetware.wetware.com [199.108.16.1]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEF865DDC4 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 22:10:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from wetware.com(ra02.wetware.com[199.108.16.82]) (1750 bytes) by wetware.wetware.com via sendmail with P:esmtp/R:bind_hosts/T:inet_zone_bind_smtp (sender: ) id for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 19:10:44 -0700 (PDT) (Smail-3.2.0.114 2001-Aug-6 #1 built 2002-Sep-2) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 19:10:45 -0700 Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-01.txt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v546) From: james woodyatt To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.546) Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thursday, Oct 24, 2002, at 18:47 US/Pacific, Vincent Lubet wrote: > On Thursday, October 24, 2002, at 08:32 AM, Bernard Aboba wrote: >> >> Does IPv6 really need yet another way of discovering DNS servers? >> We've >> got at least 4 different mechanisms for this now (and maybe I've >> forgotten >> a few). > > In my opinion this is likely the method of choice for for low end PPP > solutions because this does not require a DHCP server (or a server for > the 3 other solutions) to vent the DNS Server addresses. If it were my choice to make, we wouldn't be using either PPP *or* DHCP to discover DNS proxy services. I like the idea of bootstrapping service discovery by assigning a distinguished anycast address for DNS proxy servers. I realize that's controversial, but I'm willing to get into it. >> Seems to me that sometimes "less is more". I'm with you, Dr. Aboba. I'm not looking forward to the task of qualifying all the wonderful ways my little network appliance will have to implement for finding DNS proxy servers. I'd like to believe that IPv6 will be easier to deploy than IPv4. -- j h woodyatt From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Fri Oct 25 01:32:41 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA03874 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 01:32:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 9962391222; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 01:34:42 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 63283912F8; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 01:34:42 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 796E591222 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 01:34:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 576A15DEEE; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 01:34:41 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from internaut.com (unknown [64.38.134.99]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id D78C65DDBB for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 01:34:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (aboba@localhost) by internaut.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g9P4WGR15385; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:32:16 -0700 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:32:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Bernard Aboba To: Vincent Lubet Cc: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-01.txt In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu In IPv6, DHCPv6 "lite" can be used to provide DNS server addresses as well as any other required parameters. Since DHCPv6 "lite" is stateless, there is no need to implement stable storage. This enables a single mechanism to be used to provide IPv6 configuraition, regardless of media. Therefore there is no need to drag the mistakes of the past into the future. On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Vincent Lubet wrote: > In my opinion this is likely the method of choice for for low end PPP > solutions because this does not require a DHCP server (or a server for > the 3 other solutions) to vent the DNS Server addresses. > > Vincent Lubet From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Fri Oct 25 11:53:29 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA29457 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 11:53:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 9ECCC91307; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 11:55:31 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 67DBF91309; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 11:55:31 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E64891307 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 11:55:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 46C0C5DF2D; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 11:55:30 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from mail-out1.apple.com (mail-out1.apple.com [17.254.0.52]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA6655DDB0 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 11:55:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailgate2.apple.com (A17-129-100-225.apple.com [17.129.100.225]) by mail-out1.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g9PFtTw26532 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 08:55:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scv2.apple.com (scv2.apple.com) by mailgate2.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with ESMTP id ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 08:55:28 -0700 Received: from apple.com (lubet1.apple.com [17.202.40.146]) by scv2.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g9PFtSi28719; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 08:55:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 08:55:57 -0700 Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pppext-ipv6-dns-addr-01.txt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v546) Cc: ietf-ppp@merit.edu To: Bernard Aboba From: Vincent Lubet In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <400F3FB5-E832-11D6-982C-0003937AD75C@apple.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.546) Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thursday, October 24, 2002, at 09:32 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote: > In IPv6, DHCPv6 "lite" can be used to provide DNS server addresses as > well > as any other required parameters. Since DHCPv6 "lite" is stateless, > there > is no need to implement stable storage. This enables a single > mechanism to > be used to provide IPv6 configuraition, regardless of media. My original comment was about the fact lot of implementations do not support DHCP over PPP and I do not see how suddenly this is going to be easier to implement with IPv6. > Therefore there is no need to drag the mistakes of the past into the > future. I may have a too pragmatic approach, but I think it would be a mistake to make the implementation of IPv6 harder. In addition, many ISPs provide their service over PPP and do not support DHCP. I'm afraid that requiring ISPs to deploy DHCP for IPv6 will not accelerate the deployment of IPv6. Vincent From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Mon Oct 28 10:44:21 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14915 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:44:21 -0500 (EST) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 156179123E; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:45:51 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id C71CD9123F; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:45:50 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E7939123E for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:45:49 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 8AEB15DE1C; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:45:49 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from ureach.com (mail.ureach.com [63.150.151.36]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DBA15DE16 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:45:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from www22.ureach.com (www22.ureach.com [172.16.2.50]) by ureach.com (8.9.1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA15431; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:45:45 -0500 Received: (from nobody@localhost) by www22.ureach.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id KAA31555; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:45:44 -0500 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:45:44 -0500 Message-Id: <200210281545.KAA31555@www22.ureach.com> Received: from [12.25.1.128] by www22.ureach.com via HTTP; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 15:45:44 GMT To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu, vtw_lee@ureach.com From: Vivian Lee Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-vsuite-type: e Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi For rfc1472, the pppSecurityConfigProtocols field require us to return OID for pppSecurityProtocols which can be one of: 1) oid for pppSecurityPapProtocol 2) oid for pppSecurityChapMD5Protocol However, if the configured protocol is MS-CHAP, there is no OID defined for it. In that case, the RFC does not provide oid for MS-CHAP, then what should be done? Thanks Vivian ________________________________________________ Get your own "800" number Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Tue Oct 29 11:47:06 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA12774 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:47:05 -0500 (EST) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id E28379125A; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:49:03 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id A7FB89125C; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:49:03 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F1A89125A for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:49:02 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 4484A5DE7C; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:49:02 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from kff (dhcp93127046.columbus.rr.com [24.93.127.46]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B75445DDC0 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:49:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] by kff (ArGoSoft Mail Server Freeware, Version 1.8 (1.8.1.9)); Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:48:54 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021029114528.024ca9a0@pop-server.columbus.rr.com> X-Sender: karlfox@pop-server.columbus.rr.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:48:49 -0500 To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu From: Karl Fox Subject: Re: Implementation Survey for LCP MIB (RFC 1471) In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.2.20021008091056.03660470@pop-server.columbus.rr.c om> References: <5.1.1.6.2.20020912134307.0378c260@pop-server.columbus.rr.c om> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu Third request for LCP MIB implementation experience. I need one more implementation that supports the LQR MIB variables. Thanks, Karl At 09:24 PM 9/12/02 -0400, Karl Fox wrote: >Thanks to Mike MacFaden for developing this survey, >and my apologies to him for letting it sit on the shelf for so long. > >Thanks also to Bernard Aboba from whom I lifted most >of the introductory text. > > LCP MIB Implementation Survey > >Please fill this out and return it to karlfox@columbus.rr.com by October 27, >2002. > >For the LCP MIB (RFC 1471) to advance to Draft Standard, every feature must >have at least two independent implementations, or must be cut from the >draft. Please read these directions carefully and email your answers to me >directly, not to the list. > >I only need a reply to this if your implementation is INDEPENDENT, that is, >not based on another implementation. If you started out once upon a time >with another code base and eventually replaced all the code with fresh code, >that counts as independent. If you did your implementation from scratch, >better yet. > >Please provide contact information and fill out the Company, Product and >Version fields following their colons, and mark the features with a Y or N >*before* the feature, and keep the spelling and order exactly as they are >here (so I can automate processing the results). Lines starting with __ and >blank lines should not be marked. Lines starting with a # take a numeric or >other non-binary response; if you have a number to respond with, put your >number before the # sign. > >Y means you support that feature in your implementation NOW, N means you do >not. No fair saying that you'll be adding it later; it has to be in your >implementation that's already done and is being used somewhere, although >beta or experimental software counts as in use, as long as its actually >running. > >If you make different kinds of devices but they use the same LCP MIB >implementation, you only need to send me an entry for one. > >Thank you, > >Karl Fox >PPPEXT Working Group Chair > >---------------------------------------- > >__ LCP MIB Implementation Survey > >Contact name: >Contact email address: >Contact phone number: >Company name: >Product Name: >Product Version: > >__ Tables Supported >pppLinkStatusTable supported >pppLinkConfigTable supported read-write >pppLinkConfigTable supported, but read-only >pppLqrTable supported >pppLqrConfigTable supported read-write >pppLqrConfigTable supported, but read-only >pppLqrExtnsTable supported > >__ IF-MIB Table behavior >For any PPP rows created in the PPP-LCP-MIB do you populate the ifTable >__ with ifEntries of ifType ppp(23)? > ># If you answered N to the previous question, what does your agent return to >__ a get of pppLinkStatusPhysicalIndex? From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Tue Oct 29 11:50:21 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA13020 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:50:20 -0500 (EST) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 09BA19125C; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:52:08 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id AEB5A9125E; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:52:07 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B04D89125C for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:52:04 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 97F565DEB6; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:52:04 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from kff (dhcp93127046.columbus.rr.com [24.93.127.46]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BB9D5DDC0 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:52:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] by kff (ArGoSoft Mail Server Freeware, Version 1.8 (1.8.1.9)); Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:51:51 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021029115031.024cbec0@pop-server.columbus.rr.com> X-Sender: karlfox@pop-server.columbus.rr.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:51:45 -0500 To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu From: Karl Fox Subject: Re: Implementation Survey for PPP Security MIB (RFC 1472) In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.2.20021008091342.03664920@pop-server.columbus.rr.c om> References: <5.1.1.6.2.20020912141322.03b14d90@pop-server.columbus.rr.c om> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu Third request--we need data on two independent implementations of the PPP security MIB to advance RFC 1472. So far I have none. Thanks, Karl At 09:26 PM 9/12/02 -0400, Karl Fox wrote: >Thanks to Mike MacFaden for developing this survey, >and my apologies to him for letting it sit on the shelf for so long. > >Thanks also to Bernard Aboba from whom I lifted most >of the introductory text. > > PPP Security MIB Implementation Survey > >Please fill this out and return it to karlfox@columbus.rr.com by October 27, >2002. > >For the PPP SEC MIB (RFC 1472) to advance to Draft Standard, every feature >must have at least two independent implementations, or must be cut from the >draft. Please read these directions carefully and email your answers to me >directly, not to the list. > >I only need a reply to this if your implementation is INDEPENDENT, that is, >not based on another implementation. If you started out once upon a time >with another code base and eventually replaced all the code with fresh code, >that counts as independent. If you did your implementation from scratch, >better yet. > >Please provide contact information and fill out the Company, Product and >Version fields following their colons, and mark the features with a Y or N >*before* the feature, and keep the spelling and order exactly as they are >here (so I can automate processing the results). Lines starting with __ and >blank lines should not be marked. Lines starting with a # take a numeric or >other non-binary response; if you have a number to respond with, put your >number before the # sign. > >Y means you support that feature in your implementation NOW, N means you do >not. No fair saying that you'll be adding it later; it has to be in your >implementation that's already done and is being used somewhere, although >beta or experimental software counts as in use, as long as its actually >running. > >If you make different kinds of devices but they use the same PPP Security MIB >implementation, you only need to send me an entry for one. > >Thank you, > >Karl Fox >PPPEXT Working Group Chair > >---------------------------------------- > >__ PPP Security MIB Implementation Survey > >Contact name: >Contact email address: >Contact phone number: >Company name: >Product Name: >Product Version: > >__ Tables Supported >pppSecurityConfigTable supported read-write >pppSecurityConfigTable supported, but read-only >pppSecuritySecretsTable supported read-write >pppSecuritySecretsTable supported, but read-only > >__ Which OIDs are supported for pppSecuritySecretsProtocol? List them. ># OID 1 ># OID 2 ># OID 3 From owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Tue Oct 29 11:53:27 2002 Received: from trapdoor.merit.edu (postfix@trapdoor.merit.edu [198.108.1.26]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA13201 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:53:27 -0500 (EST) Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id 892499125E; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:55:23 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp-outgoing@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id ED7F79125F; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:55:21 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@trapdoor.merit.edu Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05B319125E for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:55:20 -0500 (EST) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id E9DCE5DE52; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:55:20 -0500 (EST) Delivered-To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu Received: from kff (dhcp93127046.columbus.rr.com [24.93.127.46]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E5355DDC0 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:55:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] by kff (ArGoSoft Mail Server Freeware, Version 1.8 (1.8.1.9)); Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:55:08 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021029115414.024cb010@pop-server.columbus.rr.com> X-Sender: karlfox@pop-server.columbus.rr.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:55:02 -0500 To: ietf-ppp@merit.edu From: Karl Fox Subject: Re: Implementation Survey for IP NCP MIB (RFC 1473) In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.2.20021008091413.03664030@pop-server.columbus.rr.c om> References: <5.1.1.6.2.20020912141315.03b13de0@pop-server.columbus.rr.c om> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-ietf-ppp@merit.edu Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-ietf-ppp-outgoing@merit.edu Third request--I need one more IPCP MIB implementation with the VJ compression questions answered. Thanks, Karl At 09:32 PM 9/12/02 -0400, Karl Fox wrote: >Thanks to Mike MacFaden for developing this survey, >and my apologies to him for letting it sit on the shelf for so long. > >Thanks also to Bernard Aboba from whom I lifted most >of the introductory text. > > IP NCP MIB Implementation Survey > >Please fill this out and return it to karlfox@columbus.rr.com by October 27, >2002. > >For the IP NCP MIB (RFC 1473) to advance to Draft Standard, every feature >must have at least two independent implementations, or must be cut from the >draft. Please read these directions carefully and email your answers to me >directly, not to the list. > >I only need a reply to this if your implementation is INDEPENDENT, that is, >not based on another implementation. If you started out once upon a time >with another code base and eventually replaced all the code with fresh code, >that counts as independent. If you did your implementation from scratch, >better yet. > >Please provide contact information and fill out the Company, Product and >Version fields following their colons, and mark the features with a Y or N >*before* the feature, and keep the spelling and order exactly as they are >here (so I can automate processing the results). Lines starting with __ and >blank lines should not be marked. Lines starting with a # take a numeric or >other non-binary response; if you have a number to respond with, put your >number before the # sign. > >Y means you support that feature in your implementation NOW, N means you do >not. No fair saying that you'll be adding it later; it has to be in your >implementation that's already done and is being used somewhere, although >beta or experimental software counts as in use, as long as its actually >running. > >If you make different kinds of devices but they use the same IP NCP MIB >implementation, you only need to send me an entry for one. > >Thank you, > >Karl Fox >PPPEXT Working Group Chair > >---------------------------------------- > >__ IP NCP MIB Implementation Survey > >Contact name: >Contact email address: >Contact phone number: >Company name: >Product Name: >Product Version: > >__ Tables Supported >pppIpTable supported >pppIpConfigTable supported read-write >pppIpConfigTable supported, but read-only > ># What value is returned for pppIpLocalMaxSlotId when >__ pppIpLocalToRemoteCompressionProtocol is vj-tcp(2)? > ># What value is returned for pppIpLocalMaxSlotId when >__ pppIpRemoteToLocalCompressionProtocol is vj-tcp(2)? > ># What value is returned when both of the above are vj-tcp(2)? > ># What value is returned when none of the above are vj-tcp(2)