Subject: Re: Layer Two Tunneling Protocol 'L2TP' - Working Group Last

From: "Pat Calhoun"<[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 12:36:40 -0600

I also agree. Until we test this autodetection of windowing
enabled/disabled on the data channel, which I still think is a horrible
idea and a gross violation of layering, will we know whether the current
L2TP is ready for prime time.

PatC

Philip Rakity <[email-masked]> AT Internet on 01/26/98 10:11:04 AM

To:   Karl Fox <[email-masked]> AT Internet@ccmail
cc:   [email-masked] AT Internet@ccmail, [email-masked] AT
      Internet@ccmail
Subject:  Re: Layer Two Tunneling Protocol 'L2TP' - Working Group Last

Karl,

I am against doing this.  We should wait until the interoperability testing
at the end of February.

We have asked on the mailing list if we can test with folks and have
received no offers.  I also telephoned the CISCO folks to see if they
wanted to test, but the answer was that they were not ready.

I believe that until testing is done, it is inappropriate to move L2TP
forward.

regards,

Philip Rakity
FlowPoint

On Mon, 19 Jan 1998, Karl Fox wrote:

> This is last call.  I will advise the area directors that we want to >
take L2TP (draft-ietf-pppext-l2tp-09.txt) to Proposed Standard on > Monday
February 2, 1998 unless there is substantive comment raised on > either of
the [email-masked] or [email-masked] mailing lists.
> --
> Karl Fox, servant of God, employee of Ascend Communications
> 655 Metro Place South, Suite 370, Dublin, Ohio  43017   +1 614 760 4041
>

Received: from usr.com (mailgate.usr.com) by robogate2.usr.com with SMTP
  (IMA Internet Exchange 2.02 Enterprise) id 4CCD4450; Mon, 26 Jan 98
  12:21:58
-0600
Received: from bodhi.zendo.com by usr.com (8.8.5/3.1.090690-US Robotics)
 id MAA15133; Mon, 26 Jan 1998 12:03:20 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by bodhi.zendo.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) id
IAA18437
for l2tp-xplod; Mon, 26 Jan 1998 08:06:48 GMT
Received: from santaclara01.pop.internex.net (santaclara01.pop.InterNex.Net
[205.158.3.18]) by bodhi.zendo.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA18426
for
<[email-masked]>; Mon, 26 Jan 1998 08:06:46 GMT
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 10:11:04 -0800 (PST)
From: Philip Rakity <[email-masked]>
To: Karl Fox <[email-masked]>
cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Layer Two Tunneling Protocol 'L2TP' - Working Group Last Call
<Pine.LNX.3.96.980126100910.27424A-100000@flowpnt>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

---

From: [email-masked] (Rich Shea)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 16:50:43 -0500

I third the sentiment.  The functionality Pat describes below makes the
delta between the draft-08 and -09 versions more than just editorial.

Pat Calhoun wrote:
> > This is last call.  I will advise the area directors that we want to
> >
> Received: from flowpoint.com ([192.84.210.69])
>           by santaclara01.pop.internex.net (Post.Office MTA v3.1.2
> release
>           (PO203-101c) ID# 0-34792U7500L7500S0) with ESMTP
>           id AAA16149; Mon, 26 Jan 1998 10:11:23 -0800
> Received: from localhost (pmr@localhost)
>           by flowpoint.com (8.8.7/8.8.4) with SMTP
>    id KAA27455; Mon, 26 Jan 1998 10:11:04 -0800
> X-Sender: pmr@flowpnt
> Call
> In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]> Message-ID:

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Richard Shea                [email-masked], [email-masked]
New Oak Communications                            978-266-1011 x210

---

From: Matt Holdrege <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 08:02:24 -0800

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but...

I thought that disabling windowing was simple. But that enabling it was the
tricky part. But that is an optional feature right? So it's not required
for interoperability, right?

>> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Matt Holdrege		http://www.ascend.com	[email-masked]

---

From: "W. Mark Townsley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 13:17:30 -0500

> for interoperability, right?

It has always been the case that if either side sent a RW AVP in the
startup messages that both sides MUST send sequence numbers and perform
congestion control on data sent if the RW AVP received is greater than
0. In short, the transmitter must be able to take an active part in flow
control if the receiver requests it. 

What is new in -09 is the ability for the LNS to decide to stop sending
sequence numbers at any time. Actually doing so is optional. Reacting to
it by ceasing to send sequence numbers (and, perhaps more importantly,
no longer expecting to see sequence numbers) is not.

---

From: Matt Holdrege <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 11:05:59 -0800

>control if the receiver requests it. 

Sorry. I think I meant re-enabling windowing. Yes you MUST cooperate at
startup. But if you disable it afterwards, then try to re-enable it later,
that is where I see potential problems.