
From fsolensky@juniper.net  Mon Jun  8 12:32:24 2009
Return-Path: <fsolensky@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: pppext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pppext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F9673A6991 for <pppext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon,  8 Jun 2009 12:32:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mK2qo7X-Z2II for <pppext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon,  8 Jun 2009 12:32:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og102.obsmtp.com (exprod7og102.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.157]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00D4D3A682D for <pppext@ietf.org>; Mon,  8 Jun 2009 12:32:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from source ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob102.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKSi1nSY/37j8LJIDsHR7b+iyg0kYGV2e5@postini.com; Mon, 08 Jun 2009 12:32:29 PDT
Received: from p-emfe01-wf.jnpr.net (172.28.145.24) by P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.375.2; Mon, 8 Jun 2009 12:27:15 -0700
Received: from EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net ([fe80::1914:3299:33d9:e43b]) by p-emfe01-wf.jnpr.net ([fe80::d0d1:653d:5b91:a123%11]) with mapi; Mon, 8 Jun 2009 15:27:14 -0400
From: Frank Solensky <fsolensky@juniper.net>
To: Mark Townsley <townsley@cisco.com>, "pppext@ietf.org" <pppext@ietf.org>, "draft-bberry-rfc4938bis@tools.ietf.org" <draft-bberry-rfc4938bis@tools.ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 15:27:13 -0400
Thread-Topic: [Pppext] Review of draft-bberry-rfc4938bis-00.txt
Thread-Index: AclF2DSEDr+LkjljR2m1baxNbV2MtiilTPLg
Message-ID: <48A3702B6745EC48BA1F7EBE2184707496C3FF9B78@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
References: <491C9E43.3090406@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <491C9E43.3090406@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "michael.d.adams@l-3.com" <michael.d.adams@l-3.com>, "bberry@cisco.com" <bberry@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Pppext] Review of draft-bberry-rfc4938bis-00.txt
X-BeenThere: pppext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: PPP Extensions <pppext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 19:32:24 -0000

Sorry for the last message but it just came to my attention that there's on=
e aspect of the draft that should be made more clear.  The way I read the d=
raft and its predecessor, the support for PADG/C messages and PADQ messages=
 are orthogonal to each other.  That is, if the exchange of PADR/S messages=
 when the session is first established does not include the Credit and Cred=
it Scale TLVs indicating PADG/C support, each side can still send PADQs.  I=
s this a correct interpretation?  Either way: should this be explicitly cal=
led out?


From root@core3.amsl.com  Tue Jun  9 15:30:01 2009
Return-Path: <root@core3.amsl.com>
X-Original-To: pppext@ietf.org
Delivered-To: pppext@core3.amsl.com
Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 52A783A69A2; Tue,  9 Jun 2009 15:30:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <20090609223001.52A783A69A2@core3.amsl.com>
Date: Tue,  9 Jun 2009 15:30:01 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: pppext@ietf.org, james.d.carlson@sun.com
Subject: [Pppext] WG Action: RECHARTER: Point-to-Point Protocol Extensions (pppext)
X-BeenThere: pppext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: iesg@ietf.org
List-Id: PPP Extensions <pppext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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, 09 Jun 2009 22:30:01 -0000

The Point-to-Point Protocol Extensions (pppext) working group in the
Internet Area of the IETF has been rechartered.  For additional
information, please contact the Area Directors or the working group
Chairs.

Point-to-Point Protocol Extensions (pppext)
--------------------------------------------
Last Modified: 2009-05-29

Additional information is available at tools.ietf.org/wg/pppext

Chair(s):
James Carlson <james.d.carlson@sun.com>

Internet Area Director(s):
Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>

Internet Area Advisor:
Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>

Mailing Lists:
General Discussion: pppext@ietf.org
To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext
In Body: subscribe
Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pppext/index.html

Description of Working Group:

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 group 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.
Similarly, the group may classify existing specifications as Historic
where this is appropriate.

Goals and Milestones:

Done   Advance SDL draft to Experimental
Done   Add VLAN support to BCP (RFC 1638) and recycle at Proposed 
       Standard
