🚀 go-pugleaf

FYI....
------------------------------------------------------------------

APS Alliane                          San Fransico, Oct 26 1992

Minutes from the formation meeting:


Date: Oct 25 1992
Plae: Stanford Court Hotel, San Fransico

Facilitators: David Knight, ISOCOR and Frode Hernes, MaXware

Present:
    Henning Brix Nissen        Native Communications A/S
    Daniel Chu                 Microsoft Corporation
    Karim Jammal               MARBEN Produit
    Mike Armitage              MARBEN Produit
    Roger K. Mizumori          Boeing Computer Services
    John M. Payne              DHL Worldwide
    Ed Owens                   cc:Mail / Lotus
    Joline Chew                BT North America Inc.
    David A. Winkler           BT North America Inc.
    Mark B. Smith              Intel Corporation
    Thierry Kuperman Le Bihan  Sequent Computer Systems
    Ralph Hedberg              Sequent Computer Systems
    Joel Guesnier              TRANSPAC
    Enzo Signore               ISOCOR
    David Knight               ISOCOR
    Bjorn Ahlen                ISOCOR
    Steve Hardcastle-Kille     ISODE Consortium
    Niraj K. Jain              Hewlett Packard
    Bruce Lowenthal            Tandem Computer
    Sue Lebeck                 Tandem Computer
    Daniel J. Blum             RAPPORT Communication
    Gene Tatarzyn              AT&T Easylink Services
    Michael Scott Baldwin      AT&T Bell Labs
    Stein Toemmer              TelePost Communication
    Ronald A. Wheeler          Pacific Bell
    Maurice Wilson             OSIWARE INC
    Frode Hernes               Norwegian Telecom MaXware
    Jan Petter Berntsen        Norwegian Telecom maXware
    Petter Braende             Norwegian Telecom
    Dr. Masayuki Nomura        NTT PC Communications Inc
    Gloria Villagomez          Retix
    David Traynor              Retix
    Roger James                Boldon James
    Eddine Walehiane           Apple Computer Europe Inc

Total attendance: 35 people, 25 companies represented.
(Complete electronic mail directory included at the end of
this document.)

Agenda:
 1. Introduction and background              David Knight
 2. Charter                                  David Knight
 3. Organization                             David Knight
 4. Time schedule                            Frode Hernes
 5. User Requirements                        Frode Hernes
 6. Discussion
 7. Where do we go from here                 David Knight

1. Introduction and background.
-------------------------------
To answer the near-term need for products implementing dial-up
functionality for X.400, both ISOCOR and maXware have recently
introduced off-the-shelf products supporting a dial-up mode.
In the case of ISOCOR's X.400 Lite product, a DOS-based X.400
server can dial into centralized communications hubs and/or
remote sites with a similar configuration.  Travelling users
on notebook computers can dial into ISOCOR's X.400 servers as
well using async as well.  Also supporting X.400 dial-up are
Norwegian Telecom/maXware's products which include Remote User
Agents (RUAs) for dial-up 1988 X.400 Message Store access via
PADs.


2. Charter
----------
The following charter was presented:

APS ALLIANCE CHARTER

- The APS Alliance aims to facilitate the use of X.400-based
  messaging by using dial-up connections to dramatically
  reduce costs and complexity.

- The APS Alliance will:

  - Develop and promote a global standard for OSI
    communication over standard dial-up telephone networks
    (PSTNs), with a particular focus on X.400/X.500.  Both
    client-server and server-server communications to be
    covered by the same stack.

  - Pursue an aggressive development schedule with the near
    term goal of delivering a specification proposal to the
    Internet community and CCITT for formalization.

  - Involve software developers, systems vendors and service
    providers to ensure universal acceptance.


3. Organization
---------------
The following organization was presented:

                 -----------------------
                 !        Members      !
                 -----------------------
                             !
                 -----------------------
                 !        Chairman     !
                 -----------------------
                             !
                 -----------------------
                 !         Editor      !
                 -----------------------
                             !
                 -----------------------
                 !       Workgroup     !
                 -----------------------

David Knight of ISOCOR was suggested and accepted as an
interim chairman.

Frode Hernes of MaXware was suggested and accepted as an
interim editor for the user requirement phase.

An external consultant will be hired to be Editor for the
technical specification.

Members, commitments payment:
Any company can join the Alliance as a member company. The
members will have to pay a membership fee which will be used
to pay an external consultant to be the editor for the
technical specifications. David Knight will distribute a
formal charter and a membership application form to all
interested parties.

The deadline for charter membership commitments is November
20th.

Voting rules:
-------------

Organizational issues: Simple majority sufficient.
Technical issues:      Two thirds majority needed.

4. Time schedule
----------------
The following calendar was presented:

           Organization   User Requirements    Specification

92 Oct 25  Formation      1st draft presented
   Nov 13                 Comment deadline
                          Editing, 1st prop.   Editing starts
   Nov 20  Members committed
   Dec 1                  Vote deadline
   Dec 2/3 Presentation fro EEMA exec. comitt
   Dec 4-5                                     Workgrp meeting
                                               (NB New date)
   Dec 11                 Final UR distr.      1st draft distr
                                               (High level)
93 Jan 1                                       Comment deadl.
                                               2nd draft
   Feb 1                                       Comment deadl.
                                               Editing
                                               1st proposal
   Mar 5                                       Vote deadline
                                               work meeting
   Mar 20                                      Final spec

As you can see from the proposed plan, the time schedule is
very aggressive, and will only hold if all involved parties
are cooperating fully.

The first important deadlines are:
   Nov 13  Deadline for comments to the preliminary user
           requirements.
   Nov 20  Deadline for written commitments from the members.
           (Members joining after this date will not be able
           to vote on the user requirements).
   Dec 1   Deadline for votes on the User Requirements.
   Dec 3-4 Workgroup meeting in London


The procedure will be:
Basic Spec.
        Deliver Spec.
                Build Prototype
                        Start Pilot - Deliver Spec to Standards
                              committee.

5. User Requirements
--------------------
The first draft of a user requirement document was presented.
The second draft, updated with some comments from the audience
is enclosed with this message.

6. Discussion
-------------
The following major limitations to the user requirements where
proposed and endorsed by the audience:

 - The aim is to connect an application to a service (as
   opposed to connecting a computer to a network).
   Connection oriented Transport service, possibly including
   support for multiplexing (TP0 or TP2).

 - It was a general agreement that wireless communication is
   important, but that this consortium does not aim to solve
   problems related to wireless communication.

 - Several persons stated their concern that if this
   consortium should tackle security issues, the proposed time
   schedule will not hold.

(A second phase of specification may be initiated when the
work from the first phase is submitted to the standards bodies
to work on security and wireless).


Comments from induvidual particippants:
- Security is best handled at the application level
  (encryption etc.. ). However, security in the form of
  authentication may be part of this project.
- Security will be needed if the protocol supports multiple
  sessions.
- PPP might be a model to use (Point-to-Point-Protocol for
  TCP/IP)
- Is it possible to handle both TCP/IP and OSI Apps?
- Managability
- Dial-in/Dial-out
- Dial back
- P7 has a high overhead.  We might be better served to look
  at a short stack P7.
  However if we stray from the network layer solution we do
  not have an entry into CCITT.



There was a wish to establish a set of user profiles as a
background for the user requirement work:

USER PROFILES

 - Mobile User to corporate X.400 MS or public MS
                - On telephone line
                - Wireless

 - Office to Office
                - Client to Server
                - Server to Server

 - Smaller office to corporate hub or public MS



7. Where do we go from here
---------------------------
- the formal charter + registration form + partisipant fee
  information will be sent to all interested parties.
- the deadlines mentioned above
  (please discuss this with your end-users)


--------------------------------------------------------------
APS Alliance
Suggested User Requirements


1. Provide means for running OSI-applications in general and
X.400 in particular over dial-up thelephone networks.

2. The solution should be suitable for all industry standard
operating systems and hardware platforms.

3. Support for multiple assosciations over the same physical
connection (e.g. P7 and DAP)

4. Efficiency and simplicity (minimal overhead, high
throughput, small amount of resource consumption, easy to
implement, small memory demands).

5. Require minimal changes to existing implementations

6. provide support for both point-to-point connections and
access PAD and PSDN network.

7. Must support use of any (automatic) modem and any PAD
service.
This means that the protocol cannot rely upon error
correctiondone by the modem. The protocol must support use of
both 7bit and 8bit PAD. The length of the PDU to be sent over
the PAD must be configurable.

8. Provide reliable transfer service by including functions
for error detection and error recovery.

Added requirements since 1st version was distributed:
-----------------------------------------------------

18. Allow for compression

19. Include placeholders for security features (which may be
added as a "phase two".

20. The low-layer protocol should be based on some existing
standard or implementation. (many candidates exist, ppp, z-
modem, X.32bis etc).

Technical user requirements
---------------------------

9. Provide a bit-transparent transfer service

10. Support use of flow control

11. Point-to-point solution should be symmetric (both parties
may take initiative to connect)

12. No restrictions on use of particular transport service.
(preferably provide an X.213 interface, and run higher layer
protocols transparently.

13. Provide the ability to identify calling party (calling
NSAP)

15. Configuration parameters should provide the ability to
optimize throughput and reduce costs, dependent of the
communication line.
Error correction compression on modem should be used if the
modems provide it.

16. Negotiation during connection establishment of possible
options.
(PDU size, windows size etc)

17. Optionally provide the ability to recover from telephone
line break when using application contexts without RTSE (e.g.
by means of TP class 4).

18. Quality of service
    - Residual error rate should be comparable to X.25

--------------------------------------------------------------


Mailing list:
-------------
(This document is sent to all email addresses of all members
of the distrubution list. It is sent as IA5 text, with one
BodyPart only. DeliveryReports, RecieptNotifications and
Replies are requested. However, since quite a lot of the
particippating people are mailed through one or more gateways,
please answer as soon as you get this document, and specify:
 - To which address did you recieve the message
 - Does your mailsystem support BodyPart type 14 (Bilaterally
   defined)
 - Do you have the capability to read WordPerfect 4.1 files ?
 - Do you have the capability to read MS Word For Windows 2.0
   files ?
 - Does your mailsystem support multiple BodyParts.
)


People attending the meeting:


BRUCE LOWENTHAL
Fax:         14082854324
DANIEL CHU
Internet:     danc(a)microsoft.com
DANIEL J BLUM
X.400:        C=US;A=MCI;S=Blum;G=Daniel;DDA.ID=0004108980
DAVID WINKLER
X.400:        C=US;A=DIALCOM;O=DLC;S=Winkler;G=David
EDDINE WALEHIANE
X.400:        C=FR;A=ATLAS;P=APPLE;O=ERD;S=WALEHIANE;G=EDDINE
ENZO SIGNORE
X.400:        C=US;A=Telemail;P=ISOCOR;S=Signore
FRODE HERNES
X.400:        C=NO;A=Telemax;O=MaXware;S=Hernes;G=Frode
GENE TATARZYN
X.400:        C=US;A=ATTMAIL;DD.ID=GTATARZYN
GLORIA VILLAGOMEZ
X.400:        C=US;A=Telemail;P=Retix;O=sm;
              S=Villagomez;G=Gloria
InterNet:     gloria-villagomez@retix.com
HENNING BRIX NISSEN
X.400:        C=DK;A=DK400;P=NATIVE;S=NISSEN;G=HENNING
JAN PETTER BERNTSEN
X.400:        C=NO;A=Telemax;O=maXware;S=Berntsen;G=Jan Petter
JOHN M. PAYNE
InterNet:     jmpayne@attmail.com
X.400:        C=US;A=ATTMAIL;DDA.ID=ljmpayne
JOLINE CHEW
X.400:        C=US;A=DIALCOM;P=BTNA-IXGW;O=BTNA;
              S=Chew;G=Joline
InterNet:     jolinec@antares.tymnet.com
KARIM JAMMAL
X.400:        C=FR;A=ATLAS;P=MARBEN;O=SURESNES;S=KJAMMAL;
OU1=MXMS
MARK B. SMITH
X.400:        C=US;A=ATTMAIL;P=INTEL;S=SMITH;G=Mark;I=mbs
MASAYUKI NOMURA
X.400:        C=JP;A=NTTPC;S=00100246
MAURICE WILSON
X.400:        C=CA;A=INFONET;P=OSIWARE;O=VANCOUVER;S=WILSON
InterNet:     wilson@vancouver.osiware.bc.ca
MIKE ARMITAGE
Fax:          +44344861001
NIRAJ K. JAIN
X.400:        C=US;A=ATTMAIL;P=HP;O=HP;S=JAIN;G=NIRAJ;
              OU1=HP6600
InterNet:     niraj@cup.hp.com
ROGER JAMES
X.400:        C=GB;A=TMAILUK;P=BJ;O=Boldon James limited;
              S=James;G=Roger
InterNet      roger@bj.co.uk
ROGER MIZUMORI
X.400:        C=US;A=TELEMAIL;P=BOEING SEATTLE;O=BOEING;
              S=MIZUMORI;G=ROGER
X.400:        C=US;A=ATTMAIL;P=BOEING SEATTLE;O=BOEING;
              S=MIZUMORI;G=ROGER
X.400:        C=US;A=MARK400;P=BOEING SEATTLE;O=BOEING;
              S=MIZUMORI;G=ROGER
RONALD A. WHEELER
X.400:        C=US;A=PACBELL;O=PACIFIC BELL;S=Wheeler;G=Ronald
InterNet:     rawheel@pacbell.com
STEIN TMMER
X.400:        C=NO;A=TELEMAX;O=telepost;S=tommer;G=stein
STEVE HARDCASTLE-KILLE
InterNet:     S.Kille@isode.com
THIERRY KUPERMAN LE BIHAN
X.400:        C=Fr;A=Atlas;P=Sequent;O=edc;S=kuperman
interNet:     thierry@gateway.sequent.com
David Knight          ISOCOR
X.400         C=US;A=TELEMAIL;P=ISOCOR;S=KNIGHT
Bjorn Ahlen           ISOCOR
X.400         C=US;A=TELEMAIL;P=ISOCOR;S=Ahlen
Enzo Signore          ISOCOR
X.400         C=US;A=TELEMAIL;P=ISOCOR;S=Signore


People not attending the meeting who have asked to be put on
the list:

Joanna Vanderwilt     Boeing
Internet:     Joannav@ATC.BOEING.COM
Bob Swindle           ICL Telecommunications Services
X.400         I=ri;S=Swindle;O=ICL;OU1=BRA401;
              P=ICL;A=GOLD400;C=GB
Pad Kinsella          Onsett International Corporation
Internet:     padk@onsett.com
Hank Magnuski         Gammalink Graphics Communications
Fax:          +1 (408) 745-2300
Khiem D. Ho           Hewlett Packard
X.400:        C=US;A=ATTMAIL;P=HP;O=HP;OU1=HP;S=Ho;G=Kiem
InterNet:     khiem@cup.hp.com
Erik Skovgaard        PSI
X.400         C=CA;A=Telecom.Canada;S=Skovgaard
Eskovgaa@cue.bc.ca
Douglas Ambort        Wollongong
InterNet:     Douglas@twg.com
Harald Alvestrand     Uninett, IETF
X.400         C=NO;A=TELEMAX;PRMD=UNINETT;
Elizabeth M. Litkowski GE Information Services
X.400         C=US;A=MARK400;O=QUIKCOMM;OU1=GEIS;
              S=LITKOWSKI;G=ELIZABETH
Debbie S. Burkert     MCI
X.400:        G=Debbie;S=Burkert;A=MCI;C=US;DDA.ID=448 1528


--------------------------------------------------------------