CURRENT MEETING REPORT Minutes of the IP over ATM Working Group Reported by Mark Laubach, Com21, Inc. Morning Session The meeting was opened by Mark Laubach and covered the usual agenda bashing. The charter was recently updated and approved by our Area Directors. IPv6 over ATM treatment was added and some statements on how the ipatm groups relates to the ROLC, RSVP, and Integrated Services Working Groups. The two server synchronization presentations were moved together in the morning session to permit easier comparison. Mark Laubach and Andy Malis (the ROLC chair) presented a chair's statement regarding rolc and ipatm coordination of the transition from ATMARP to ATMARP + NHRP to NHRP. A mention was made that the AD's stated that a step-wise transition plan is required for any evolution of a widely deployed proposed standard. Interoperability must be maintained so that existing implementations don't break and that within the LIS, all clients must be able to resolve the address of any other client by required default behavior regardless of implementation or deployment. Andy Malis presented ROLC status. The packet formats for NHRP and MARS have been "harmonized". The ROLC Working Group consensus was to remove NHRP mention from the RFC1577 update Internet-Draft. As this originally was done as part of the Danvers joint IPATM/ROLC meeting session, ROLC and the IPATM chairs felt that ROLC had the OK to remove NHRP from the work in progress. Andy Malis presented a proposed ROLC/IPATM Liaison to the ATM Forum. The liaison included two sections, one suggesting leveraging the LANE Configuration Server (LEEKS) for IETF uses, the second asking for LAN Emulation Configuration Server redundancy. The consensus was that the liaison be submitted as is and that it just represents the first communication on the subject. There was much discussion on this topic. It was clear that more discussion on both auto-configuration and server synchronization needs to be discussed in order to proceed with any formal definition of how to incorporate LECS's or other configuration servers into the classic IPATM standards development. The ATM Forum Liaison status was given as an informal report from the ATM Forum member attendees. George Swallow reported that the Multiprotocol over ATM (MPOA) effort is work in progress will be relying on the ROLC NHRP and IPATM mars work. The IETF <> ATM Forum mailing lists, as reported at the Stockholm ATM Forum BOF, still have not been set up by the ATM Forum. Keith McCloghrie presented an informational overview of an ATM Forum contribution for providing an ATMARP server address via the ILMI. This was presented as a simple mechanism for the short term. An issue was raised if the mechanism can support hosts that are in multiple LISs. The consensus was that Keith and others raise this issue at the ATM Forum meeting next week. Ken White and Maria Greene presented an update of the RFC1577+ MIB. A question was raised about multiple addresses. The MIB creates a virtual interface per IP address and handled in the net to media table. This work will continue and be presented for real review by the next IETF meeting. The NHRP MIB editors and the IPATM MIB editors are sharing information for coordination opportunities. The IPATM chair noted that there will likely at a joint session at the next IETF meeting for the integrated-services, RSVP, and IPATM working groups. Steven Berson presented an information and discussion treatment of an approach to RSVP over IP over ATM. Issues were raised about the transition from currently active Virtual Channels (VCs) to new VCs with the new reservation. RSVP over the ATM model has some problematic areas. RSVP defaults to best effort if the reservation fails, which seems to indicate that a multicast group would need to maintain a best effort VC along with a Quality of Service (QOS) VC. Sources do not get reservation error messages. Comments were made about all this needs to work with the routing pieces. Comment was also raised that the aggregation model appears to be very complicated. A much closer work for IP over ATM might be to take the integrated services API and map that over VCs. Andy Malis chaired the remainder of the morning session. Mark Laubach presented the RFC1577 update Internet-draft model draft-ietf-ipatm-classic2-00 of the epidemic database distribution model. Questions are raised about how this relates to flooding models. The observation was raised as to why not use point-to-multipoint capabilities and the answer was that the Epidemic algorithms are based on point to point connections with feedback. A question was raised with regards to patent and licensing issues. Mark will explicitly check with Xerox PARC. [Just afterthe IETF meeting ended and before these minutes were produced, Bryan Lyles from Xerox PARC reported back via email that there is no known patent issues regarding the epidemic method referenced in the classic2 draft.] Carl Marcinik presented the Distributed ATMARP model based on the work in draft-marcinik-ipatm-dist-atmarp-00. The work is based on a set of servers connected by a full mesh of point-to-multipoint VCs. Evening Session Between sessions the ROLC and IPATM chairs, along with the Routing Area Director (Joel Halpern) and the Internet area directors (Susan Thomson and Frank Kastenholz) met to discuss the transition plan and direction of the working groups. The recommendations to the working groups from this meeting are that the 1) classic2 draft should proceed with ATMARP and without reference to NHRP, 2) the classic2 draft should proceed and include ATMARP server synchronization, 3) that IPATM and ROLC working groups should coordinate MIA development, explore leveraging the same server synchronization methods, and keep in mind that future IAB/IETF directions may require authenticated address registration (i.e., this is a heads up and don't preclude a straightforward evolution to this as part of the synchronization work), and 4) a future ROLC RFC will be used to specify how to substitute NHRP for ATMARP; i.e., ipatm will continue to develop ATMARP in its work at this time. Andy Malis acted as working group chair for the continued server synchronization presentations and discussions. A discussion was held comparing the two ATMARP synchronization schemes, draft-ietf-ipatm-classic2-00 and draft-marcinik-ipatm-dist- atmarp-00. Among the issues discussed were ju st how many ATMARP servers does the classic LIS need to support? Will the server protocol need to be ATMARP only or multiprotocol? There was much discussion relating to scaling, number of clients, servers, and sites to support, time to market, usability by rolc, etc. There was no clear consensus on these items, therefore the acting chairman (Andy Malis) presented a set of goals for the synchronization issue that would be used as proposals. Mark Laubach will distribute these out on the mailing list for comment and refinement. Tim Smith presented draft-smith-ipatm-bcast-01 for discussion. The consensus was to put this on the work plan and keep as a separate document with target towards the proposed standards track. Tim will release an update to the document based on the new ipmc-10 update. Grenville Armitage presented draft-ietf-ipatm-ipv6nd-00. Time was short and the presentation covered an overview of the draft. Due to time, no issues were raised. The chair recommended that people read the draft and send comments to the list. Peter Schulter presented draft-schulter-ipv6atm-framework-00. Due to time constraints, Peter could only present an overview. The issue was raised that the method presented in the draft needs to be compared to rolc's nhrp model. The chair recommended that people read the draft and send comments to the list. Carl Marcinik presented draft-marcinik-ipatm-auto-arp-00. Due to time constraints, Carl could only present a brief overview of the draft. The chair recommended that people read the draft and send comments to the list. There was not enough time to present and discuss the work plan agenda item. The refinement of the 1996 work plan will be discussed on the list.