CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_ Reported by Mark Laubach/Hewlett-Packard Minutes of the IP Over Asynchronous Transfer Mode Working Group (IPATM) Implementation Review There are currently implementations at NRL, FORE, and Cray Research. John Cavanaugh said that it would soon be worked on at the Minnesota Supercomputer Center. No implementation summaries were given. ATM Forum Liaison Report o Physical - 51 Mbit ATM - T1 o Traffic Management - T1S1 Class Y service basis - Vote on rate-based or credit-based approaches in September. Design done for March, for UNI 4.0 o Signalling - UNI 3.1 delta spec completed, will be publically available. UNI 3.1 is not compatible with UNI 3.0 due to SSCOP changes. ITU decided to make non-interoperable changes to SSCOP after 3.0 was released. o Progressing on UNI 4.0 - Target for March - Group addresses - Leaf-initiated join - 3rd-Party call setup - Multiple signaling channels on a UNI to support muxes and concentrators o Private NNI working group - Approved development of Phase 0 P-NNI standard using UNI 3.1 signaling and static routes. Simple, no routing protocol. Purpose is to allow a minimum level of interoperability between ATM switch vendors - Progressing on Phase One packet formats, DTLs, link attributes, and connection crankback (recovery from source route with old information) - It will be middle of next year ('95) until we see something. o LAN Emulation working group - Resolved all but two outstanding issues: one is multiple MAC resolution issue - Adopted MIB for for LANE Client - Will locate LE Configuration services using ILMI, well-known addresses, or well known VPI/VCI - Established liaison with IEEE 802.5. - Scheduled to complete in September o B-ICI working group - Completed Version 1.1 specification - E.164 addresses in NSAP format will be REQUIRED. Existing address allocation will follow current procedures. o QOS working group - Will deprecate QOS classes in favor of distinct QOS parameters (mean CTD, CLR, etc.) o Multiprotocol BOF - BOF to be held in September focusing on Multiprotocol operation with ATM - ATM Forum would like a list of requirements that will be in that effort. We need to prepare this for them for September meeting. ATM Signaling Draft An IESG Last Call (closing on 6 August) has been issued on this document. Maryann Perez gave a summary of the changes from the last draft to this one: Frame Relay interworking put in annex, and there is an issue about VC idle timers. Drew brought up the issue that signaling should give an indication of connections over LAN/WAN. Erik Fair raised the issue that it should include feedback of time versus byte charging also. The document will be published as a UNI 3.0 draft now. Fix 3.0/3.1 issue on Proposed to Draft transition. IPng Brian Carpenter raised the issue that this working group should eschew the issues of IPng over ATM unless specifically added to the working group charter. Everyone agreed to this. Also, Brian mentioned that ATMers might be well advised to keep an eye on IPng auto configuration since it might not cater for an NBMA model unless reminded about this need. MTU Jeff Young from Cray Researched raised the issue of default MTU. The problem (marketing) is that implementors are not supporting a 64K octet MTU on 622 Mbps links. They are supporting a 9180 octet MTU. There was some discussion and a reminder about past working group decisions. An opinion was given that we deal with this issue on the Proposed to Draft roll of the affected RFCs by including a statement, something to the effect that implementors supporting 622 Mbps links might want to consider supporting the 64K octet MTU. Framework Document It was requested that the working group consider cleaning up the framework document and publishing it in some manner, e.g., an Informational RFC. This will be done by the next working group meeting. A summary of the conventional IP over ATM draft will be included. Multicasting The group slipped again on any multicasting documents. As part of the ATM Forum requirements list, a statement will be included on requirements for mapping IP multicasting to ATM multicasting. This item will be an action item for the San Jose meeting in December. Internet ATM NAP Model John Cavanaugh gave a single slide overview of the near term IP over ATM model that will be adopted by the Internet ATM NAP sites. Current DSU boxes do not interoperate with the native ATM interfaces presented by some routers. Basically, Frame Relay encapsulation is used by the DSU and HSSI interfaces on routers. LLC/SNAP is used on native ATM router interfaces and on hosts. The NAP goal is to be LLC/SNAP (RFCs 1483 and 1577) compliant as soon as possible. Action Items 1. Signaling draft Last Call, cleanup, and elevation request. 2. ATM Forum list of requirements in slide presentation format to our ATM Forum liaison (Drew Perkins) by the ATM Forum meeting during the week of 26 September. A separate mailing list will be created for this activity. 3. Start update work on the framework document and publish it. 4. Take input from item #2 for multicasting requirements and continue work on this in the working group.