INTERIM_MEETING_REPORT_ Reported by Mike Ritter/Apple Minutes of the IP over AppleTalk Working Group (APPLEIP) January 15, 1992 PPP/AppleTalk: New drafts are available in the Internet-Drafts Directory, they will also be posted on AppleLink in the Networking Standards Folder. RFC 1171 & 1172 have been rewritten into one document, with additions for authentication and dial-back. Brad Parker has been writing the AppleTalk specifics and has changed the address negotiation so it has a better chance of working. The specifications should be reviewed and commented on by those interested in AppleTalk and PPP. The following specifications are available in the Internet-Drafts Directory on nic.ddn.mil or nnsc.nsf.net draft-ietf-pppext-appletalk-00.txt draft-ietf-pppext-authentication-02.txt draft-ietf-pppext-lcp-02.txt MacIP: John Veizades and Tom Evans are negotiating over the final draft and will have it posted by mid-February. MIBs: People expressed interest in the following MIBs: o AppleTalk MIB+ transports and configuration o Local Talk Repeater o AT over PPP o AURP o ARAP o MacIP o AFP o Printer Server o DecNet over LT o Mac System MIB - informational RFC Anyone interested on working on any of these MIBs should send their names and a proposed Charter to the Apple-IP mailing list. Peter Caswell and Garth Conboy from Pacer expressed intense interest in working on an AppleTalk Services MIB (Print, FileShare, etc.) Some 1 others expressed an interest in the ARAP Server MIB. Apple is also interested in helping out on these, please contact Mike Ritter at MWRitter@applelink.apple.com and he will try to get the correct parties together. Karen Frisa from CMU has been volunteered to work on the AppleTalk MIB+ (by Steve Waldbusser). There was general consensus that this MIB should cover all of Inside AppleTalk (except AFP) and that it should try to address the problem of router configuration. Authentication for the AppleTalk MIB and routers was discussed. It was agreed that any serious attempts should implement the SNMP security protocols. Since these are still in the draft stages, vendors discussed what they are using today. Most routers implement a trusted IP address. For SNMP over AppleTalk it was noted that, due to dynamic node addressing, a trusted node address was unworkable, but that a trusted net number range was basically equivalent to a trusted IP host list. There is a ``connectathon'' at Apple which will test inter-operation of AURP, ARAP, and SNMP over AppleTalk. Tools to exercise the implementations are available from Apple. (For SNMP test tools (both over IP and AppleTalk) contact BLEE@applelink.apple.com.) Mike Ritter of Apple promised to try to get the source of the SNMP test tools released. InterConn offered demo versions of their management console product that does SNMP over DDP (and runs on a Macintosh). People who have SNMP Agents should talk to InterConn about incorporating their MIBs into the product. AURP: Alan Oppenheimer reported that AURP router operational experience with several Universities was being set up. For AURP test tools contact OPPENHEIME1@applelink.apple.com. He also has copies of a document for the routing protocol and update state diagram. Alan has withdrawn the AURP draft from the IETF standards track. He is working on an AURP document with APDA that will be an Apple standard and recommended that an RFC should be written that describes how to run AURP on the Internet. The APDA document will also be published as an informational RFC. The MIB description for AURP was sent out to the list - please send comments to Alan and the list. AppleTalk Directorate: John Veizades promised to be an open and unbiased Working Group Chair and professed an ability to keep things confidential if requested. He asked two questions: 1. What would an AppleTalk Directorate be? and 2. What is the process and what concerns do people have? 2 Frank Slaughter volunteered his thoughts. He was disgruntled because he thought the Group was working on an open standard (AURP) and it turned out to be an Apple standard. He does not want to work on Apple standards, but does want to work on open standards. He said everyone was standardizing on TCP/IP for wide-area connectivity because the IETF process really works. He said the difference between vendor and IETF standards are that an IETF standard has an open forum available to work on it, try it out, and later it's declared officially done by the IAB. A vendor specific standard has the vendor product and the protocol done at the same time. He thought that to make AppleTalk really usable for wide area connectivity and large networks the IETF open standards process must be adhered to. Greg Minshall, from Novell said that in the IETF this Group is unique in that it is very vendor specific. The only reason there is interest in making these protocols open is because of the number of Macintoshes there are in the market. He suggest that Macintosh to local routers as opposed to Router to Router would be a logical place to split the ownership of the protocol. He also reminded people that what is done here relates to all Apple products. Don't get too idealistic about how working groups work and the problems that do or do not follow. Greg also recommended that the Group split into separate working groups and have a specific Charter for each topic. There is an attempt to do everything in this one Group which is wrong. John Veizades pointed out that splitting working groups into other existing directorates may cause problems because the Directors don't know anything about AppleTalk. Jonathan Wenocur seconded the idea of splitting up into separate working groups and recommended that when an issue comes up it should be made clear where the future control of a protocol lies - will it be an IETF protocol or will it be an Apple standard? Frank Slaughter wanted the Group to make this statement: ``Things that are done by this Working Group are open standards and that is what we are working towards.'' There was general consensus that this was correct. Alan Oppenheimer said that AURP 2.0 could be a standard protocol of the IETF, Apple can put it under the IETF's control. Frank Slaughter said that he does not feel the need to have Apple's stamp of approval for future work. John Veizades summarized that the Working Group has carved out a niche that it is willing to work on open standards for AppleTalk solutions (under IETF control) and doesn't require Apple's approval. Apple can be a participant just like any other vendor. There was general consensus that this was correct. Greg Minshall put forth that the IAB doesn't want to take over Apple protocols that Apple wants to keep proprietary. 3 Bob Morgan asked if there were several working groups should there be an AppleTalk Directorate that stays around to guide all of the working groups in this area. Is there really a need for one? Jonathan Wenocour said that a Directorate is important because of AppleTalk integration into IP areas (AURP, KIP, CAP, etc.) The IETF would feel safer with more control over AppleTalk, especially with the possibility of large AppleTalk internets tunneling through the Internet, but there is the potential for conflicts with Apple. John Veizades pointed to the work being done for AppleTalk over PPP. He said that this Group can do important work without touching on what's inside AppleTalk or other Apple proprietary protocols. He said the Group is wildly enthusiastic about being able to do work in areas that are not Apple proprietary protocols and everyone agreed. John Veizades recommended that someone should write up a Working Group Charter for the following areas if they were interested: AppleTalk interior (and exterior) routing protocols that scale better than the present one, network management and MIBs, AppleTalk over PPP, AppleTalk over a variety of link layers, wide-area naming, and configuration management and any other areas that people thought needed work on. Greg Minshall posed the question: Does Apple have an obligation to cede a protocol or tell the Working Group that they are working in the same area? He answered it by saying that it was impossible to expect this. What working groups do are open standards, what Apple does can be Apple standards. In addition he recommended that the working groups have Charters and limit their discussions to the Agenda. The next meeting will be held during with the IETF Plenary in San Diego (March 16-20, 1992). Attendees Debbie Alsop Alsop.D@applelink.apple.com Philipe Boulanger Access.priv@applelink.apple.com Craig Brenner Brenner2@applelink.apple.com Rich Brown Richard.E.Brown@DARTMOUTH.EDU Jerome Calvo transware@Applelink.Apple.Com Peter Caswell pfc@pacer.soft.com Edward Ching eching@wc.novell.com Cyrus Chow cchow@ames.arc.nasa.gov Garth Conboy gc@pacer.soft.com Joy Cordell J_CORDELL@VMSNET.ENET.DEC.COM Donald Eastlake dee@ranger.enet.dec.com Richard Ford 72510.553@compuserve.com Karen Frisa karen.frisa@andrew.cmu.edu John Gawf gawf@compatible.com Bob Jeckell robert_jeckell@nso.3com.com Grisha Kotlyar grisha@farallon.com Fidelia Kuang kuang@apple.com Louise Laier laierl@applelink.apple.com Greg Merrell merrell@greg.enet.dec.com 4 Greg Minshall minshall@wc.novell.com Robert Morgan morgan@jessica.stanford.edu Alan Oppenheimer oppenheimer1@applelink.apple.com J. Bradford Parker brad@cayman.com Christopher Ranch cranch@novell.com Michael Ritter mwritter@applelink.apple.com Randy Ryals D2604@applelink.apple.com John Schafer john_schafer@um.cc.umich.edu Mike Schumacher ms@telebit.com Frank Slaughter fgs@shiva.com Evan Solley solley@applelink.apple.com David S.A. Stine dstine@cisco.com Michael Swan neon.sw@applelink.apple.com Steve Sweeney steves@farallon.com Bob Van Andel BVA@applelink.apple.com John Veizades veizades@apple.com Jonathan Wenocur jhw@shiva.com 5