Subject: PPPoE Protocol and the IETF

From: "Reinaldo Penno" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:13:40 -0700

Hello,

In the years following the publication of the PPPoE protocol much
operational experience and  customer feedback was gathered. These
deployments led to the discovery of several  shortcomings or enhancements
needed such as (but not limited to): QoS, Multicast, MIBs,  Route Updates,
Seamless Service Selection, etc.  

Even tough several companies stepped forward and wrote drafts proposing
solutions to these issues, the lack of a appropriate forum within the IETF
to discuss them had undesired consequences for these proposals such as
little adoption or interoperability problems when adopted. Not to mention
that the original PPPoE RFC (2516) has an informational status.

Due to the widespread use of this protocol and the issues mentioned above,
we are proposing  that the interested parties join the newly created mailing
list for the purpose to discuss how to create within the IETF an official
forum to standardize the PPPoE protocol and related work. We are also
working with the Internet Area Directors on possibly holding a BOF, and one
of the purposes of creating the mailing list is to gauge interest and
discuss what a WG would do.

Here are some references to work related to the PPPoE protocol:

http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-song-pppoe-ext-multicast-00.txt
http://community.roxen.com/developers/idocs/drafts/draft-wheeler-info-pppoe-
mib-00.html
http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-penno-pppoe-ext-qos-00.txt
http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-penno-pppoe-ext-service-03.txt
http://community.roxen.com/developers/idocs/drafts/draft-carrel-info-pppoe-e
xt-00.html
http://community.roxen.com/developers/idocs/drafts/draft-fiaschi-qoscapabili
ty-ppp-00.txt
http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-dasilva-l2tp-relaysvc-00.txt

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2516.txt?number=2516

To subscribe to the mailing list, visit the URL:
http://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/pppoe-ietf or
send a message to [email-masked] with the word
"subscribe" (without the quotes) in the message body

thanks,

Reinaldo Penno

---

From: Pat Calhoun <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:39:45 -0700

To be fair, there already was a BOF. The consensus, as I recall, was that
existing protocols should be used for this purpose, and there was no need
for something new.

I see no reason to re-open old wounds. There is nothing wrong with an
Informational RFC, as far as I can tell. Plenty of interoperable products,
and that I believe was the goal.

PatC