[IMR] IMR90-09.TXT September 1990 INTERNET MONTHLY REPORTS ------------------------ The purpose of these reports is to communicate to the Internet Research Group the accomplishments, milestones reached, or problems discovered by the participating organizations. This report is for research use only, and is not for public distribution. Each organization is expected to submit a 1/2 page report on the first business day of the month describing the previous month's activities. These reports should be submitted via network mail to Ann Westine (Westine@ISI.EDU) or Karen Roubicek (Roubicek@NNSC.NSF.NET). TABLE OF CONTENTS INTERNET ACTIVITIES BOARD IAB MESSAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 3 INTERNET RESEARCH REPORTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 4 AUTONOMOUS NETWORKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 4 END-TO-END SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 4 PRIVACY AND SECURITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 4 COLLABORATION TECHNOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 5 INTERNET ENGINEERING REPORTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 5 Westine [Page 1]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 Internet Projects BARRNET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 13 BOLT BERANEK AND NEWMAN, INC., . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 13 CERFNET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 14 CICNET. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 14 CORNELL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 15 CREN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 15 FARNET. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 15 ISI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 16 JVNCNET, NORTH EAST RESEARCH REGIONAL NETWORK . . . . . . page 17 LOS NETTOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 17 MERIT/COMPUTER NETWORK-MICHNET . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 17 MIDNET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 19 MIT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 19 MITRE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 19 MRNET. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 19 NCAR/USAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 19 NEW ENGLAND ACADEMIC AND RESEARCH NETWORK . . . . . . . . page 19 NNSC, UCAR/BOLT BERANEK and NEWMAN, INC., . . . . . . . . page 20 NORTHWESTNET. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 21 NSFNET BACKBONE, MERIT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 21 NDRE and NTA-RD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 22 NYSERNET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 23 OARNET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 23 PENNSYLVANIA RESEARCH AND ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP NETWORK . page 24 PITTSBURGH SUPERCOMPUTER CENTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 25 SAN DIEGO SUPERCOMPUTER CENTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 25 SESQUINET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 25 SRI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 25 SURANET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 26 TEXAS HIGHER EDUCATION NETWORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 27 UCL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 27 UDEL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 27 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN/NCSANET . . . page 28 WESTNET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 28 WISCNET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 28 Westine [Page 2]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 IAB MESSAGE MORE ON CONNECTED STATUS, ETC The IAB recommendations contained in RFC-1174 ("IAB Recommended Policy on Distributed Internet Identifier Assignment and IAB Recommended Policy Change to Internet 'Connected' Status", August 1990) have been accepted by the Federal Networking Council (FNC). The changes are being implemented as quickly as possible by the DDN NIC and by appropriate agencies in other countries, to ease the growth of the international Internet. It has been asked whether the "connected status" requirement is to be dropped on Autonomous System numbers as well as IP network numbers; the answer is most assuredly "yes". INTERNET STANDARDS ACTIONS The IAB has approved the following four IESG recommendations: o Proposed Standard state for the CMIP-over-TCP (CMOT) specification, from the "OSI Internet Management" Working Group of the IETF. This protocol is an implementors agreement for the use of CMIP (the ISO International Standard network management protocol) over TCP. This new version of CMOT uses a subset of the ISO SMI ("Structure and Identification of Management Information") rather than the Internet Standard SMI (RFC-1155). o Advancement to Draft Standard state of the IP-over-FDDI spec, produced by Dave Katz on behalf of the "IP over FDDI" Working Group of IETF. A revised RFC will be published, replacing RFC-1103. Note that RFC-1103 was erroneously listed as an Internet Standard in RFC-1140, the latest edition of the "IAB Official Protocol Standards" document. o Proposed Standard state for the Internet IS-IS routing protocol, produced by the "IS-IS for IP Internets" Working group of the IETF. o Advancement to Draft Standard state for the Telnet Linemode Option, produced by the IETF Telnet Working Group. A new RFC will be published with some changes and extensions, replacing RFC-1116. Host system vendors are urged to track the Telnet Linemode Option, as it is expected to provide important benefits for Internet users. For example, Section 3.3.5 of the Host Westine [Page 3]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 Requirements RFC-1123 says, "This option will greatly decrease packet cost of Telnet sessions and will also give much better user response over congested or long-delay networks". Bob Braden (Braden@ISI.EDU) INTERNET RESEARCH REPORTS ------------------------- AUTONOMOUS NETWORKS ------------------- No specific progress to report for this month. Currently considering calling a meeting for October/November. A second teleconference meeting will probably be held sometime in February with John Crowcroft and other UK folks. Deborah Estrin (Estrin@USC.EDU) END-TO-END SERVICES ------------------- No progress to report this month. Bob Braden (Braden@ISI.EDU) PRIVACY AND SECURITY -------------------- Since the wayward August report did not show up in the last monthly, I should note that the PSRG met in conjunction with the IETF meeting in Vancouver. An open meeting regarding Privacy Enhanced Mail and joint meetings with policy and authentication Working Groups dominated the agenda. These resulted in several changes to the P-E Mail RFCs which will be advised of on the "pem-dev" mailing list, and in a plan for individual members of the PSRG to act as liaisons for the security concerns of other WGs. Rob Shirey distributed another draft of the Security Architecture RFC at the August meeting, and that will be among the topics on the agenda at the upcoming meeting October 23-25 at MITRE McLean. Westine [Page 4]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 Privacy-Enhanced Mail is in beta test at NIST, TIS and BBN Communications, and BBN will be demoing this software and certificate generation software at Interop 90 in October. Ken Rossen (kenr@BBN.COM) COLLABORATION TECHNOLOGY ------------------------ No report received. INTERNET ENGINEERING REPORTS ---------------------------- This report covers the following topics: IETF ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES a) Reminder -- Next Meeting b) Trial modifications to the IETF meeting format c) Actions to encourage WG productivity d) IESG Activity - Standards Management - New Network Management Directorate IETF TECHNICAL AND STANDARDS ACTIVITY a) "Technical Summaries" in IESG recommendations to IAB b) Internet-Drafts for September 1990 c) Standards actions for September 1990 d) New Working Group 1) IETF Administrative Issues a) Reminder -- Next Meeting The next IETF meeting will be December 4-7, 1990 in Boulder Colorado. The meeting will be jointly sponsored by Westnet and NCAR. Carol Ward (University of Colorado) and Don Morris (NCAR) are the local hosts. A very interesting technical agenda on high performance transport protocols is beginning to take shape. Westine [Page 5]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 b) Trial modifications to the IETF meeting format The attendance at IETF meetings has increased from under 100 to nearly 300 in the last 2 years. During this period the number of working groups has increased from 12 to over 45. Although I generally take this growth as a positive sign of success, it should also alert us to look for ways to make sure this new activity is integrated smoothly into the existing IETF structure. In this section, I report some trial modifications to the Boulder IETF meeting format, based on suggestions by attendees. In the next section, I note ways for WG chairs and attendees to keep meetings highly productive. In the FSU IETF plenary in February 1990, we decided to reduce the number of IETF meetings from four per year to three per year. At the next two IETF plenaries (Pittsburgh/May 1990, Vancouver/August 1990), we decided to expand the current 3.5 day meeting format to 4.5 days on a trial basis. Together with the new 4.5 day format, we have decided to include several other suggestions in the trial. We have divided each full day into 3 periods, resulting in 13 periods total. Eight of these will be WG sessions, three periods will be devoted to technical presentations, one for an open plenary/IESG session, and one for a reporting session on Friday morning. Total time for WGs is increased by a third, while time for other regular IETF features (eg, technical presentations, reports, IESG) remain about the same. The trial format for the Boulder meeting will look like: Mon Tues Weds Thu Fri --- ---- ---- --- --- 9:00-12:00 WG WG WG WG Reports 1:30-3:30 WG WG WG Tech 4:00-6:00 WG Tech Tech IESG Main registration will be on Sunday evening. Again in response to suggestions, we will offer more technical presentations by moving some to within WG Westine [Page 6]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 sessions. For example, we will move the network status reports into the NJM or TEWG working group sessions. We will be looking forward to comments on these new features. c) Actions to encourage WG productivity As a reminder to WG chairs and WG attendees, there are some specific actions that can be done to help make WG meetings more productive. WG chair actions: 1) WG chairs are asked to provide "charters" and meeting reports, both of which are openly available online and in IETF Proceedings. The purpose of charters and reports is to help prospective attendees understand the objectives and status of the group, so that they can come to meetings prepared. 2) WG chairs can further assist prospective attendees in preparing for meetings by providing an agenda and document reading list for each WG meeting. This will help attendees prepare for meetings. Plus, having an explicit agenda helps the WG focus the meeting and keep it on track. WG attendee actions: IETF Working Group meetings are technical *working* sessions. Active, informed, constructive participation is welcomed and encouraged. Observers are also welcome. WG meetings are generally fully open (although some WG sessions may be open only to document reviewers). To get the most out of WG attendance (for yourself and for the WG), attendees should come to meetings with a good understanding of the WG background and progress-to-date. Attendees can become familiar with the current status and progress of WGs in several ways. 1) WG objectives and notes from previous meetings are available online (send to iesg- secretary@nri.reston.va.us for retrieval instructions). 2) WG objectives and notes from previous meetings are also reproduced in the hardcopy Proceedings (to order Proceedings, send to proceedings@nri.reston.va.us). 3) Agendas and reading lists for WG meetings will also be posted to the respective WG mailing lists. Westine [Page 7]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 d) IESG Activity - Standards Management The IAB and IETF were founded, and continue to function, as technical development groups for Internet networking technology. Out of necessity over the past several years, the IAB and IETF have evolved a standards-making component to define the protocols and procedures used in the Internet more rigorously. Although this standards process is now reasonably well defined (see RFC1140), there are certain aspects of the process (and the procedures to implement the process) that are still "ad hoc". This is particularly true in the way that the IESG treats new work and the way that IESG makes recommendations to the IAB regarding standards actions. In order to develop clearer IETF/IESG standards procedures, I have asked Dave Crocker (DEC) to establish a new IETF Standards Management position on the IESG. The specific charter of this new position will be to: 1) Write down new and existing IESG standards practices in a "IETF Standards Practices Handbook". 2) Propose new or amended practices where needed to fill out a fully-developed IETF/IESG standards practice (up through the recommendation to the IAB). 3) Act as coordinator to help move specific protocols through the IETF/IESG standards process. 4) Act as the liaison between the IESG and IAB on standards activity. This might include developing new general procedures for IAB/IESG interaction, helping to conduct "Technical Reviews" when needed, or generally tracking IESG recommendations through the IAB. I envision that much responsibility will still belong to each Area Director for specific standards actions (e.g., primary responsiblity for advancing work to the IESG from IETF working groups, providing "Technical Summaries" (see 2a. below), etc,). And Greg Vaudrueil (CNRI), as IESG Secretary, will continue to act as the agent for most of the specific actions (e.g., formulating the actual IESG recommendations and forwarding to the IAB, etc). Westine [Page 8]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 However, in addition to recommending and codifying the standard practices, the new IESG Standards Manager will act as a backstop to make sure the process is followed in an expeditious manner, and nothing gets lost in the cracks. In order to provide adequate focus on this new activity, Dave Crocker will give over his role as Network Management Area Director to the newly organized IESG Network Management Directorate. This is the subject of the next topic. - New Network Management Directorate One of Dave Crocker's goals as NM AD has been to form a NM "Review Board". The goal of this board would be to provide broad community perspective and input to IETF network mangement development decisions. For example, such a board would perform the key role of guiding and reviewing Internet MIB development activity. With Dave's moving from the NM area to a new Standards management role, it became clear that the time for forming this group had arrived. We are now forming an "IETF Network Management Directorate". The NM Directorate will be a composed of approximately 9 persons. Its chair will also serve as the IESG NM Area Director. The NM directorate is not entirely in place. However, I am very pleased to be announce that Chuck Davin (MIT) will be able to serve as the new NM AD and chair of the NM Directorate. He and I, after consultation with the IESG and other participants in the NM area, have identified candidates for the rest of the group and are in the process of inviting them to join. He and I hope to be able to announce the complete membership of the new NM directorate in next month's report. 2) IETF Technical and Standards Activity a) "Technical Summaries" to be included in IESG recommendations to IAB The IESG is called upon to make recommendations to the IAB on Internet standards activity. The most common example is when an IETF Working Group wishes to submit a protocol document to the IAB for standardization. In such a case, the WG chair forwards the protocol document to the IESG via the relevant Area Director. The IESG then forwards a recommendation to the IAB (usually after open discussion at Westine [Page 9]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 an IETF meeting). All IESG recommendations to the IAB are cc'ed to the IETF mailing list. In the future, the IESG will furnish a "Technical Summary" as part of all standards recommendation packages. A "Technical Summary" will include a brief overview of the document, and explain the motivation for the particular technical approach taken. "Technical Summaries" are different from "Technical Reviews". The more concise "Technical Summary" is meant to give a brief overview of the main technical points, and will become a routine part of all future IESG recommendations to the IAB. "Technical Summaries" will be provided by the document author or Area Director. "Technical Reviews" would generally be a more thorough, but less frequent, review conducted by a separate group drawn together by the IESG and/or by the relevant Area Director. So far, there have only been "Reviews" for CMOT, BGP, (and less formally) PPP and MTU Discovery. To summarize (and, hopefully, to help clarify our evolving process): - The IESG makes recommendations to the IAB on Internet standards actions. These IESG recommendations are usually formulated after discussion at an open plenary session of the IETF. The final recommendation is always cc'ed to the IETF mailing list. - In the future, the IESG will include a "Technical Summary" as part of the recommendation package. The "Summary" will be provided by the document author or the appropriate AD. - A wider, more comprehensive "Technical Review" may also be requested by either the IESG or IAB, but this is expected to be a less frequent occurrence. b) Internet-Drafts for September 1990 The following thirteen new or revised Internet-Drafts were installed in the online IETF directories this month. (Please send to iesg-secretary@nri.reston.va.us for instructions on how to access the online IETF directories.) Westine [Page 10]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 Title: Definitions of Managed Objects for the T1 Carrier Interface Filename: draft-ietf-snmp-t1mib-01.txt First Posted: 04/23/1990 Revised: 09/26/1990 Title: Experimental Definitions of Managed Objects Filename: draft-ietf-iwg-bgp-mib-01.txt First Posted: 07/17/1990 Revised: 09/21/1990 Title: The Finger User Information Protocol Filename: draft-zimmerman-finger-03.txt First Posted: 09/04/1990 Title: Internet Stream Protocol Filename: draft-ietf-cip-st2-00.txt First Posted: 09/04/1990 Title: Towards Concise MIB Definitions Filename: draft-ietf-snmp-mibdefinitions-01.txt First Posted: 09/05/1990 Revised: 09/26/1990 Title: A Convention for Defining Traps for use with the SNMP Filename: draft-ietf-snmp-traps-01.txt First Posted: 09/05/1990 Title: Experimental Definitions of Managed Objects for the PPP Filename: draft-ietf-ppp-pppmib-01.txt First Posted: 09/10/1990 Title: Extensions to the Generic-Interface MIB Filename: draft-ietf-snmp-interfacemibext-00.txt First Posted: 09/12/1990 Title: Transmission of IP Datagrams and ARP Packets over ARCNET Filename: draft-provan-iparcnet-00.txt First Posted: 09/17/1990 Title: Requirements for Internet IP Routers Filename: draft-ietf-rreq-iprouters-00.txt First Posted: 09/17/1990 Title: IEEE 802.4 Token Bus MIB Filename: draft-ietf-snmp-tokenbusmib-00.txt First Posted: 09/26/1990 Westine [Page 11]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 Title: Definitions of Managed Objects for Ethernet-like Interfaces Filename: draft-ietf-snmp-ethernetmib-00.txt First Posted: 09/26/1990 Title: IEEE 802.5 Token Ring MIB Filename: draft-ietf-snmp-tokenringmib-00.txt First Posted: 09/26/1990 c) Standards Actions for September 1990 In September, the IESG made the following standards recommendations to the IAB: Issue IESG Recommendation - IP over FDDI Draft Standard - MTU Discovery Proposed Standard - Integrated IS-IS Proposed Standard - Telnet Linemode Draft Standard - Telnet Environment Option Proposed Standard The results of these recommendations will be recorded in future IAB reports or in the quarterly "IAB Official Protocol Standards" RFC (current version is RFC 1140). d) New Working Group announced in September 1990 OSI X.500 (osix500) Chair: Steve Kille, S.Kille@cs.ucl.ac.uk Mailing Lists: General Discussion: ietf-osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk To Subscribe: ietf-osi-ds-request@cs.ucl.ac.uk Phill Gross (pgross@NRI.RESTON.VA.US) IETF Chair Westine [Page 12]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 INTERNET PROJECTS ----------------- BARRNET ------- No report received. BOLT BERANEK AND NEWMAN INC. ---------------------------- TCP-TP4 PROTOCOL TRANSLATION A demonstration was run using a simple telnet-over-TP4 application. A user logged in on an OSI host, SUN Unix running SunLink-OSI, and connected through the protocol converter to an Internet host at another site, where he logged in, typed some commands, and printed some text mail. The OSI (TP4) was carried over an X.25 net, and the TCP over parts of the Internet between BBN and DARPA. BBN along with SHAPE Technical Centre are documenting the results of the implementation and demonstration. INTERNET O&M / ICBNET INFRASTRUCTURE The TWBNet gateway located at FIX-West (NASA Ames Research Center) was upgraded to support a new video/multimedia conferencing facility at RIACS. The RIACS conferencing facility replaces the facility that had been located at SRI. A TWBNet gateway was installed at the Naval Ocean Systems Center (NOSC) in San Diego, CA. Connection of the gateway to the TWBNet is pending completion of the T1 line linking the NOSC site to the TWBNet Wideband Packet Packet Switch (WPS) in Los Angeles. The US endpoint of the 64 Kbps connection to the ICBNet gateway at the Italian National Research Council (CNUCE) in Pisa, Italy was re-homed from the TWBNet gateway at DARPA (Arlington, VA) to the TWBNet gateway at FIX-East (SURANet/UMd). This change was made in anticipation of the relocation of the DARPA offices. Operation of the re-homed link was unstable during the first few weeks of operation, due to a combination of hardware and software problems within the SURANet gateway. As of the end of the month, these problems appear to have been resolved and the CNUCE<->FIX-East connection was exhibiting stable operation. Westine [Page 13]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 TERRESTRIAL WIDEBAND NETWORK AND ST/IP GATEWAY During September, the ST Gateway and Terrestrial Wideband projects supported two video conferences and no SIMNET exercises. Both video conferences involved 2 sites. Conference participants included Ira Richer (DARPA) and Bob Kahn (NRI). A major milestone was achieved with the establishment of the first video connection to University College in London. Also, the ST gateway and video conference suite located at SRI were moved to RIACS at Ames Research Center at Moffet Field. Connectivity for this site is being provided via the Los Angeles WPS. We presented a paper on "The DARPA Wideband Dual Bus Protocol" at the ACM SIGCOMM '90 conference in Philadelphia, 9/24-27. Inter-Domain Policy Routing During the month of September, we continued to work on the software modules for the individual IDPR protocols, which are all well in hand. The main focus of our work in September has been making sure we have clean yet flexible interfaces between the higher layer routing protocols and the lower layer transport functions. We have also replaced the reliable transmission part of each IDPR protocol with a single transport protocol that serves all IDPR protocols. This makes for a cleaner design, but has complicated the interface definition task. In fact, the definition of this interface has proved to be one of the most difficult parts of the whole IDPR system, but we now believe that it is very close to the way we want it. The collaborative effort of SAIC, USC, and BBN has helped to ensure that we do not omit crucial details of IDPR functionality, as we near completion of implementation and prepare for DARTNET testing. Bob Hinden (Hinden@BBN.COM) CERFNET ------- No report received. CICNET ------- No report received. Westine [Page 14]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 CORNELL ------- No report received. CREN ----- The CSNET West Coast Cluster was directly connected to the NSFNET in August. Traffic from the Cluster is now directly connected to the NSFNET. Traffic from the West Coast cluster in California goes through olivetti.com at Menlo Park over a T1 line to the NSS at the San Diego Supercomputer Center (SDSC). On the East Coast, traffic from what can now be called the CSNET East Coast Cluster, which includes PhoneNet and Dial-Up IP sites, continues to go through NEARNET to the NSS at JVNCNET, in Princeton, NJ. The East Coast Cluster and the West Coast Cluster are also connected by a cross-country fractional T1 line (a 256KB channel), which was installed in January 1990. This is still the preferred route for traffic within CSNET. +-----+ Cross-Country Fractional T1 Line +-----+ +-----+ |CSNET|-------------------------------------------|CSNET|--|NEAR-| | WCC | | ECC | | NET | +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ | | | T1 line (direct) Several|hops | | +-----+ +-----+ | SDSC| |JVNC-| | Cntr| | NET | +-----+ +-----+ | NSFNET | ================================================================== If for any reason traffic from either the WCC or the ECC cannot be routed through the NSS, it is automatically switched to the Cross- Country Fractional T1 Line. Similarly, if the Cross-Country Line fails, its traffic is switched to the NSSs. by Karen Roubicek (roubicek@sh.cs.net) FARNET ------- No report received. Westine [Page 15]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 ISI --- INTERNET CONCEPTS PROJECT Jon Postel visited Sun Corporation in San Francisco September 25th, to discuss networking. Paul Mockapetris visited RIACS Corporation in San Jose, regarding conferencing, September 18th. Ann Westine presented a paper at the 1990 ACM SIGUCCS User Services Conference XVIII in Cincinnati, Ohio, Sep 29-Oct 3. Two RFCs were published this month. RFC 1181: Blokzijl, R., "RIPE Terms of Reference", RIPE/NIKHEF September 1990. RFC 1183: Everhart, C., (TRANSARC), L. Mamakos (UNIV. MARYLAND), R. Ullman (PRIME COMPUTER), and P. Mockapetris (ISI) "New DNS RR Definitions", October 1990. Ann Westine (Westine@ISI.EDU) MULTIMEDIA CONFERENCING PROJECT The multimedia teleconferencing facility at SRI has been moved a short distance to RIACS in Mountain View. This was so that the ST Gateway could be moved to NASA Ames where it connects to FIX-West. We thank SRI for their support of the facility over the past year and a half. The facility will continue to be available in its new location for teleconferences by research working groups, etc. All sites now include a PictureTel codec that gives better quality images in addition to the Concept codec that allows multiple sites to conference together. The Host Control Protocol (HCP), defined by BBN, has been incorporated into the multimedia conference control program, MMCC, and the packet video host, PVP. This gives MMCC separate control of voice and video connections so that video-only calls (with in- band audio) can be placed to the UK site. This new control path will also allow implementation of switched multi-site conferencing with PictureTel codecs. This is part of the larger effort to port the teleconferencing system to the SPARCstation in which HCP will be used to control both PVP and the voice host program, VT. We have already tested SPARCstation-VT connections across an Ethernet. We are ready to begin testing the SPARCstation-VT with the BBN Butterfly-VT as soon as the new version of the ST gateway that supports IP encapsulation is deployed by BBN. Westine [Page 16]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 Steve Pink from the Swedish Institute for Computer Science visited ISI to learn about our implementation of packet voice and video software on the SPARCstation. We hope to collaborate with SICS on multimedia conferencing issues. The ST protocol specification was put into RFC-ready form by BBN and ISI authors this month in response to comments received on the IETF-draft version. It should be an RFC next month. Eve Schooler, Steve Casner, Annette Deschon, Dave Walden (schooler@ISI.EDU, casner@ISI.EDU, deschon@ISI.EDU, djwalden@ISI.EDU) FAST PARTS No report received. JVNCNET, NORTH EAST RESEARCH REGIONAL NETWORK --------------------------------------------- No report received. LOS NETTOS ---------- Remote console access kits were installed at TIS, USC, TRW, and NOSC. The CMU SNMP package was adapted for monitoring Los Nettos. Walt Prue (Prue@ISI.EDU) MERIT COMPUTER NETWORK/MICHNET ------------------------------ (July, August, September) The state-wide network operated by the Merit Computer Network now has a new name--"MichNet." The MichNet name is being adopted at this time to reflect changing technologies being applied to the state network as well as the recent commitment to expand the network to reach out beyond Merit's traditional audience of four- year, publically supported colleges and universities in Michigan. With this name change, the Merit name will apply specifically to the organization that manages and operates MichNet and which also has networking projects at the national level through its NSFNET program. Merit worked with IBM and MCI in the formation of a new corporation, Advanced Network & Services, Inc., which will focus on Westine [Page 17]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 national networking and operate the NSFNET under subcontract to Merit. The new corporation was officially launched at a press conference in Washington on September 17, 1990. Douglas Van Houweling, Vice Provost for Information Technology at the University of Michigan, was chosen by the Merit Board of Directors as the Merit representative on the new ANS Board of Directors. Van Houweling will serve along with one representative each from IBM and MCI and five others who have been chosen to represent other organizations with broad interest in national research and education networking. Work is progressing nicely on our new IP router statewide backbone project. A prototype network is being configured to test out many of our assumptions about routing, traffic patterns, and to rigorously test out our new software. This prototype network will carry production traffic from the beginning. We have not made a final selection of routers, and so are using routers in this stage which were owned by or lent to the member universities for the testing. As part of the new backbone upgrade, we have broken off part of our net 35 addresses into separate addresses for each campus. Most of the Merit/Michnet member universities have changed IP addresses on their campuses, or are planning to do so within the next few months. The new addresses are (note status of change over in this chart): University New Number Status ================================================================= Central Michigan 141.209.0.0 Not Changed Eastern Michigan 192.73.75.0 Not Changed Oakland University 141.210.0.0 Change Complete University of Michigan 141.211.0.0 Change Complete 141.212.0.0 " 141.213.0.0 " 141.214.0.0 " 141.215.0.0 " 141.216.0.0 " Wayne State 141.217.0.0 In Process Western Michigan 141.218.0.0 In Process Michigan Tech 141.219.0.0 In Process Westine [Page 18]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 Eric Aupperle and Jeff Ogden of the Merit/Michnet staff attended the FARNET meeting at the end of September, representing the network. Glenn McGregor, a member of the programming staff, attended SIGCOMM. Scott Gerstenberger, Jeff Ogden, and Dana Sitzler attended the Third Annual State of Educational Technology Conference in Detroit. by Pat McGregor (patmcg@merit.edu) MIDNET ------ No report received. MIT-LCS ------- No report received. Chuck Davin (jrd@PITT.LCS.MIT.EDU) MITRE Corporation ----------------- No new developments to report this month. Allison Mankin (mankin@gateway.mitre.org) MRNET ----- No report received. NCAR/USAN --------- No report received. NEW ENGLAND ACADEMIC AND RESEARCH NETWORK ----------------------------------------- NEARnet continued to grow in September, to a total of 56 members. The NEARnet backbone has been extended to Western Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine and Rhode Island; a connection to the University of Vermont will be installed in October. This will bring NEARnet points of presence into five New England states. Westine [Page 19]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 The current membership of NEARnet is distributed as follows: 10 MB (microwave) 8 sites T1 (leased line) 7 128 KB (leased line) 1 56 KB (leased line) 34 9.6KB (leased line) 6 The third NEARnet technical and user seminar will be held at BBN on October 26. Topics to be covered include "Introducing the Internet at Your Organization" and "Managing Network Security." Presenters will come from NEARnet member organizations, including MIT, the University of Maine, Middlebury College, Harvard University, and Prospect Innovation Center; NEARnet will also host the executive director of CICnet, the regional network that serves the Midwest. NEARnet and ESnet, the Energy Sciences network, will be connected at MIT this fall. The connection will be based on TCP/IP initially and will support DECNET (for NEARnet members who are also users of ESnet) later this year. Technical details are still being worked out. Cisco gateways in the NEARAnet core are being upgraded to the CSC-3 processor. The upgrade will be completed in October. NEARnet's connection to the NSFNET backbone via JVNCnet is being upgraded to a dedicated T1 circuit between Boston and Princeton, New Jersey, to eliminate the multihop shared links that are currently in place. Plans for the installation of the 45MB NEARnet NSS at MIT late in 1990 are proceeding on schedule. by John Rugo (jrugo@nic.near.net) NNSC, UCAR/BOLT BERANEK and NEWMAN, INC. ---------------------------------------- Karen Roubicek attended the FARNET Meeting in Boulder, Colorado and hosted by the Colorado Supernet. Craig Partridge attended the SIGCOMM Conference in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Two new FYI RFCs published by the IETF User Services Working Group (USWG), "A Bibliography of Internetworking Information" and the "Answers to Commonly asked "New Internet User" Questions are now available through the NSFNET portion of the Info-Server. The file names for these documents are "userdoc-bibliography" and "questions_and_answers". by Corinne Carroll (ccarroll@nnsc.nsf.net) Westine [Page 20]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 NORTHWESTNET ------------ No report received. NSF BACKBONE (Merit) -------------------- An 11.13% increase in the number of packets coming into the NSFNET backbone is represented by the September total count of 4,144,462,818 inbound packets over the August total inbound packet count of 3,729,357,107. Networks configured for announcement on the NSFNET backbone totalled 1980 at the end of September. On 17 September 1990, Merit, Inc., IBM Corporation and MCI Communi- cations Corporation announced the establishment of Advanced Network and Services, Inc. (ANS). The new not-for-profit organization will manage and operate the federally-funded NSFNET backbone, under subcontract to Merit, as well as provide a broad spectrum of networking services to researchers and educators in universities, federal laboratories and the private sector. These services range from basic network monitoring to complete networking connectivity and support. ANS will begin to connect additional educational, industrial and government institutions to the nation's largest public computer network at speeds up to 45 megabits per second (T3). ANS is being established to help build and expand current networking capabilities to meet the skyrocketing demand of the nation's scientists, engineers and educators for high-speed networking. As part of the expansion of the NSFNET backbone, a new node located at Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, became operational at the end of September. Two T1 circuits, one terminating at the node in Houston, TX and the other at the Pittsburgh Supercomputer Center in Pittsburgh, PA, connect the new node to the T1 NSFNET. The Atlanta node will provide additional connections to the South- eastern University Research Association Network, SURAnet. A new version of NNStat which incorporates byte counts has been deployed on all nodes of the operational backbone. The Connectionless Network Protocol (CLNP) has been deployed on all routers across the backbone. Wideband peering with NSFNET has been implemented at FIX-EAST and FIX-WEST. This will allow for international networks announced by the United Kingdom to directly peer with the networks of U.S. federal agencies. Merit/NSFNET Information Services, committed to providing current information on national networking to all users of the NSFNET Westine [Page 21]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 backbone, will sponsor a two-and-a-half-day seminar in Ann Arbor, Michigan, November 12, 13, and 14, 1990. "Making Your NSFNET Connection Count" will be an informative seminar focusing on issues of interest to campus computing leaders, information systems and networking administrators, educational liaisons, librarians, and educators who want to learn more about national networking. Information may be obtained via e-mail to seminar@merit.edu or phoning 1-800-66-MERIT. Representatives from JPL were guests at the Merit/NSFNET Network Operations Center in September. Dave Piscitello of Bellcore was also a guest, and spoke on Switched Multi-Megabit Data Service. Susan Calcari and Ken Horning, of Merit/NSFNET Information Services, presented information on the NSFNET backbone project at a reception highlighting ongoing research activities at three Michigan universities. The collaborative effort of the University of Michigan, which hosts the Merit Network Operations Center, Michigan State University and Wayne State University, was held at the National Botanic Gardens in Washington, D.C. for members of the Michigan congressional delegation as well as Washington, D.C.-area alumni. Glee Cady, Manager of Merit/NSFNET Information Services, attended the National Information Standards Organization Annual Program in New York. Elise Gerich, of Merit/NSFNET Internet Engineering, participated in the Washington, D.C. meeting of the FEPG. Eric Aupperle, President of Merit, Inc., was its representative to FARNET in Boulder, CO. Laura Kelleher and Pat Smith, both of Merit/NSFNET Information Services, attended the 1990 ACM SIGUCCS User Services Conference XVIII in Cincinnati, Ohio. Laura, former editor of the Merit/NSFNET "Link Letter", was awarded 1st Prize in the Newsletter Competition for newsletters of fewer than 16 pages. Pat, current editor of the "Link Letter", accepted the award for Best Article Under 1500 Words given to "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About FDDI Basics" by Dave Katz. Pat also participated in a meeting of the SIGUCCS Networking Task Force Advisory Board which convened before the conference. Jo Ann Ward (jward@merit.edu) NDRE and NTA-RD --------------- No report received. Westine [Page 22]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 NYSERNET -------- No report received. OARNET ------ NEW OARnet T1 NETWORK BACKBONE IN PLACE The Ohio Academic Resources Network (OARnet), a part of the Ohio Supercomputer Center has put in place a higher speed computer network linking universities across the state. A network "backbone" connecting Cleveland, Akron, Columbus, Cincinnati, and Toledo is capable of transmitting data at T1 rates. Formerly all links between Ohio Universities were low-speed 9600 bps or medium-speed 56Kb/s. The new state backbone network is 24 times faster than before. In fact, all previous OARnet circuits were combined (multiplexed) into one T1 circuit to Columbus. The OARnet network using Internet TCP/IP protocols provides for networking applications such as electronic mail, file transfers, and remote logins. These traditional networking applications do not require high-speed connections. The T1 network makes possible new applications such as interactive remote supercomputer visualization. The University of Akron, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland State University, NASA-Lewis, and Kent State University have installed full T1 connections to nearest POPs. Some existing OARnet sites and all new OARnet sites will be connected at the POPs. OARnet provides access to U.S. TCP/IP networks via NSFnet and CICnet. The National Science Foundation NSFnet, the national educational research Internet backbone, consists of T1 links between national supercomputer centers. CICnet, the regional network of Big Ten universities plus Chicago, was the first regional network composed of all T1 circuits. The OARnet T1 project has been a cooperative effort. Charles Bender, Director of the Ohio Supercomputer Center, and Alison Brown, OARnet Director, have been firmly committed to providing high-speed network access to the CRAY Y-MP supercomputer for users around the state. The State of Ohio Network Integrated Communications (SONIC) has provided communication links, space in their communication centers at Cleveland and Akron, and support personnel. The Univerity of Akron, Bowling Green University, University of Cincinnati, and NASA-Lewis in Cleveland have helped finance portions of the T1 Westine [Page 23]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 backbone. Dan Wintringham, OARnet Engineering manager, John Wieronski, Kannan Varadhan, and Henry Clark have worked most of the year on putting the complicated technology in place and making it work. The Ohio State University has contributed technical support. OARnet RECEIVES NSF GRANT OARnet, the Ohio Academic Resources Network, has received a grant in the amountof $110,000 from the National Science Foundation to connect 5 new schools to OARnet and upgrade one school's connection to 56Kb. Six Ohio schools participated in the grant proposal: Central State University,in Wilberforce, Ohio; Muskingum College in New Concord, Ohio; Ohio Northern University in Ada; Shawnee State University in Portsmouth; Sinclair Community College in Dayton; and Wilberforce University in Wilberforce. Central State University currently has a DECNET connection to OARnet; they will be upgrading to a 56Kb connection. The remaining schools are new members, and will be connecting at 56Kb line speed. The funds received from the NSF will be distributed over FY 1990- 1991. The first year's funds will be used to purchase capital equipment for the new schools. Funding for the second year is contingent on the NSF receiving their budget allocation fraom Congress in the amount they requested. If the Graham-Ruddman Act goes into effect, this will impact budget allocation for theNSF, and OARnet will not received any funds for 1991. However, the schools are preparing contingency plans should this occur. If OARnet does receive second year funding, this money will be used to pay partial line charges for the schools. The OARnet engineering staff expects that the new connections and the upgrade in line speed will be completed shortly after the first of the year. For more information, contact Lin Daniels at (614) 292-8100 or lin@osc.edu by Lin Daniels (lin@osc.edu) PENNSYLVANIA RESEARCH AND ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP NETWORK ------------------------------------------------------ Since our last report, we have added three members to our network. They include Devon Systems, Inc., US Bureau of Mines, and Visual Understanding Systems, Inc. (VISUS). This brings our total membership to 35. Tom Cummings (tc1r@andrew.cmu.edu) Westine [Page 24]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 PITTSBURGH SUPERCOMPUTER CENTER ------------------------------- No report received. SAN DIEGO SUPERCOMPUTER CENTER ------------------------------ Our Proteon p4200's DECnet routing problems have stopped. One was traced to a remote node duplicating that router's DECnet node number. The other has not been traced to its cause, so our fingers are still crossed, but is suspected to have been caused by that remote LAN's configuration. CSnet's Westcoast NSFnet was turned up in during August and is in operational use. CSnet has tested it and its Eastcoast relative for proper function during failover. During August we changed our peer from Mozart.sdsc.edu (cisco/EGP) to VIP.sdsc.edu (SUN/gated/EGP). In September this system was upgraded to gated 2.0 alpha. We have tweaked QFT to support the transport of BITnet & ESnet files to and from our UNICOS Cray Y-MP. As an side note, during one week in September we lost a total of 7 disks on various systems ranging from out Y-Mp to a couple of SparcStations. Needless to say, that was a very interesting week! Paul Love (loveep@sdsc.edu) SESQUINET --------- No report received. SRI ---- DDN NIC In September, we assigned 117 numbers to new IP networks. The total number of all assigned IP numbers is now 5,411 networks. The total number of assigned Autonomous System numbers (ASNs) is now 1,100. There are currently a total of 1,993 registered domains which includes 55 at the top level, 1,888 at the second level, and 50 Westine [Page 25]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 third-level MIL domains. Douglas MacGowan (MACGOWAN@NIC.DDN.MIL) In order to proceed with the recommendations made in RFC 1174 on the assignment of network and autonomous system numbers without distinction between connected vs. unconnected status, the NIC has been in the process of making some significant modifications to the WHOIS database and information server. Beginning in the second week of October information about all registered networks will be available via the WHOIS server with no regard to their previous connectivity nstatus. In addition, WHOIS will accept queries about autonomous system numbers. That information was never before available via WHOIS. NIC staff members are also in the process of revamping the applications that are used to assign internet and autonomous system numbers. We will be incorporating changes that have been suggested by several people in the internet community in addition to our own staff. We plan to send an announcement to the community when these updated applications are ready for FTP access. Mary Stahl (stahl@NISC.SRI.COM) SURANET ------- During July, SURAnet moved to new facilities adjacent to the University of Maryland, College Park campus. Our new address is: 8400 Baltimore Blvd. Suite 101 College Park, Maryland 20740 Main Phone: (301)982-4600 NOC Phone: (301)982-3214 Fax Phone: (301)982-4605 In conjunction with the move, SURAnet became the Federal Interagency Exchange for the east coast region, also known as FIX- East. The agencies that comprise FIX-East are the Department of Energy (Energy Sciences Network), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA Science Network), the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (The Terrestrial Wideband Network), the Department of Defense (Mailbridge to Milnet)and the National Science Foundation (NSS connection to NSFnet Backbone). Westine [Page 26]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 At present, there are 120 sites online and 166 networks being advertised to theNSFnet. A current list of sites and networks can be obtained via anonymous FTP from noc.sura.net, password "guest", cd "pub". The file name is "online". Any questions or inquiries can be directed to Diana Scotti or Dr. Jack Hahn at (301)982-4600, or email @umd5.umd.edu. by Diana Scotti (scotti@umd5.umd.edu) TEXAS HIGHER EDUCATION NETWORK ------------------------------ No report received. UCL ---- The UCL Video Conferencing facility is now functioning. A half hour session between BBN and London ran fairly smoothly. The codecs were only set up for 128 kbps video although we had plenty more bandwidth. There was also a succesful test session to DARPA/Washington. A half day meeting is scheduled for the beginning of October. The codec is attached to the UCL Livenet video switch, which means that it is also feasible to conference to other London College sites (e.g. QMW or Imperial College). International multi-media conferencing brings with it whole new problems of network resource reservation and time zone differences! We are working on control of a separate departmental video switch with connections through to multi-media workstations in collaboration with a RACE project. Jon Crowcroft attended the SIGCOMM '90 Symposium in Philadelphia. John Crowcroft (j.crowcroft@CS.UCL.AC.UK) UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE ---------------------- 1. While overall connectivity within and without our regional network has been generally good this month, the fraction of packets dropped transiting the College Park switchyard continues to climb. Currently, the fraction dropped due all Westine [Page 27]  Internet Monthly Report September 1990 causes is running 1.3 percent. 2. Our DARTNET router has settled in with appropriate protocol trappings, including DNS and NTP, but is still without a T1 interface. Mike Davis managed to tame its timekeeping systems so that now it keeps time usually within a few hundred microseconds. 3. Judah Levine at NIST Boulder has completed a nice series of experiments evaluating various methods of Internet time transfer, including NTP. He is hoping to obtain a dedicated NTP time server at NIST to supplement the present informal server now operating. Since a dedicated server would be tied directly to NIST standards, this service would be a valuable supplement to present methods, which rely on sometimes cantankerous radios. Dave Mills (Mills@UDEL.EDU) UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN/NCSANET -------------------------------------------------- No report received. WESTNET -------- No report received. WISCNET ------- No report received. Westine [Page 28]