Subject: FW: Secure Internet Live Conferencing RFC proposition (fwd)

From: "Scott Hollenbeck" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 09:47:52 -0400

I'd like to ask the WG chairs to please take a look at the documents
described below.  As you can see, the IESG has received a request to
consider publication of several documents as proposed standards.  They
describe technology that is similar to some of the instant messaging work
that is being done in the IETF, so I'd like to collect opinions from those
of you that have been chairing groups doing similar work.  Please read this
document as well:

http://silcnet.org/docs/draft-riikonen-silc-rfc2779-00.txt

It contains an analysis of SILC and the requirements described in RFC 2279
as performed by Pekka Riikonen.

If possible, please send any comments that you might have within two weeks
(by 10 June).  Please send them directly to me, and feel free to cc
[email-masked] if you wish.

-Scott-

-----Original Message-----
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 10:41 PM
To: Scott Hollenbeck; [email-masked]
Subject: Secure Internet Live Conferencing RFC proposition (fwd)

Here's the message I wanted you to take on answering.

---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Date: 13. mai 2004 11:13 +0200
From: Pekka Riikonen <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Secure Internet Live Conferencing RFC proposition

The SILC project, which is developing the protocol called Secure Internet
Live Conferencing (SILC) is proposing to the IESG to submit the following
Internet Draft specifications as RFCs as follows:

As Technical Specifications (TS) to the Standards Track:

- Secure Internet Live Conferencing (SILC)	    as Proposed Standard
  draft-riikonen-silc-spec-08.txt

- SILC Packet Protocol				    as Proposed Standard
  draft-riikonen-silc-pp-08.txt

- SILC Key Exchange and Authentication Protocols    as Proposed Standard
  draft-riikonen-silc-ke-auth-08.txt

- SILC Commands					    as Proposed Standard
  draft-riikonen-silc-commands-06.txt

As Applicability Statements (AS) to the Non-Standards Track:

- SILC Message Flag Payloads			    as Informational
  draft-riikonen-silc-flags-payloads-04.txt

- User Online Presence and Information Attributes   as Informational
  draft-riikonen-presence-attrs-03.txt

The first four specifications proposed in the Standards Track as Proposed
Standard RFC define the actual protocol framework, packet types and packet
payloads, key exchange and authentication protocols, and commands.  All
specifications define an important part of the protocol and in combination
forms the full SILC protocol specification.

The additional two specifications proposed in the Non-Standards Track as
Informational RFC defines optional or additional features for the
protocol.  The last specification does not relate directly to the SILC
protocol, but is generic in nature.  It has been developed while
developing SILC protocol and the SILC protocol uses it as a reference for
optional features.

This is the first time the SILC Project is proposing any SILC protocol
specification to the IESG.  Despite of known typographical errors in the
documents we do not expect any other major changes to them at this point
of time.

SILC Protocol Background

The SILC protocol development started in the year 1996 as a replacement
for the IRC protocol.  A first implementation of the protocol was done in
1997.  Protocol specifications unfortunately were never written properly
nor submitted to the IETF.  The development of the protocol resumed by
redesigning some parts of the protocol in 1999.  The first versions of the
protocol specifications were submitted to the IETF in the spring 2000.
> From thereon the SILC Project has submitted new revisions of the protocol
specifications to the IETF every six months.  The current version of the
protocol is 1.2.

The protocol was redesigned in the 1999.  Major new concepts was
introduced to the protocol and it became clear the SILC would be more than
a replacement to the IRC protocol.  The SILC protocol combines features
from IRC style protocols and IM (Instant Messaging) style protocols.  The
protocol may be implemented as IRC style or IM style application.  The
protocol also introduces features that has not been seen in IRC protocol
or any current IM protocol, including the new XMPP IM protocol developed
in the XMPP WG.

One basic concept of SILC protocol however have remained from the year
1996;  the security.  In 1999 the protocol was also redesigned from the
security perspective to meet the growing security needs in contemporary
networks.  The security features in the protocol has been improved over
the years when new issues has been discovered in the security community.
The protocol has been designed from attacker's point view to render all
known attacks ineffective or inapplicable against SILC.  The protocol does
not introduce any new security concepts but uses the common security
practices as defined in myriad of IETF specifications and other standard
specifications.

The protocol has matured over the years and has now reached a level when
going forward with the specifications in the IETF makes sense.  The SILC
protocol includes several specifications which in combination defines the
SILC protocol suite.  Reference implementation of the protocol also
exists.  The SILC project has been implementing the protocol and providing
it as a reference for other implementors.  At least two implementations
exists of the SILC protocol.  The reference implementation is one which is
to implement all required features and optional features and to provide it
as a reference.  Another implementation was done by an individual from a
separate code base.  It implemented the protocol version 1.1.  The author
placed the implementation to public and others implemented support for
protocol version 1.2 to it.  That implementation is incomplete, however,
successful interoperability testing has been performed with the reference
implementation (for both 1.1 and 1.2 versions).

The reference implementation naturally implements both client and server
sides of the protocol, but the second implementation currently implements
only the client side of the protocol.  We have no knowledge of another
server side implementation at this time.

The protocol is currently stable and we expect only minor changes to the
specifications at this point of time.  Some issues remain in the protocol,
like definition of more advanced routing of messages in the SILC style
network.  These issues however does not affect the protocol stability, or
prohibit creation of conforming implementations or going forward in the
standardization procedures in the IETF.  Most of these issues can be
resolved in the future by releasing additional specification documents.

SILC Protocol and IETF Working Groups

The SILC protocol has been developed outside the formal IETF working group
procedures.  It is not the main goal of the SILC project now, nor in the
past, to develop the protocol in a working group in IETF.  While this very
well might be a possibility in the future, as said, it is not the main
goal of SILC project.  While the protocol has not been developed in a
working group, similar procedures has existed within the SILC project.
And as you know, we have also been submitting the specifications to the
IETF as individual submissions for several years.

The SILC protocol also may not fit directly to any existing working group.
For example, the IRC working group has not existed in several years in
IETF.  A working group that may relate to SILC is the IMPP (Instant
Messaging and Presence Protocol) WG.  While that group specificly develops
towards IM protocol, SILC may be related to that group.  Again, it is not
our main goal to propose SILC as IMPP protocol.  We leave this sort of
consideration for the IESG and IETF.

The IMPP WG has published the RFC 2779 (Instant Messaging / Presence
Protocol Requirements).  SILC protocol does not claim conformance to that
specification as the SILC protocol was developed before that specification
was published.  However, later on we have kept the RFC 2779 in our minds
when developing the SILC protocol.  We have also done investigation which
indicates that SILC indeed conforms or may conform with RFC 2779 (it may
if optional features are implemented).  We may provide additional
documentation to the IESG and IETF to establish the relationship between
SILC and RFC 2779 requirements, if such documentation is needed.

The SILC protocol, however, suites very well to the environments as
described in the specifications published by the IMPP WG.  The SILC
protocol scales well, is robust and compact, and suites in the mobile
networks as well.  In fact, the protocol specificly takes the mobile
application needs into consideration.  The protocol is also extensible and
new protocol level features can be introduced to the protocol without
loosing backwards compatibility or without need to revise the main
protocol specification.

Even though, the SILC protocol was initially developed as an alternative
to the IRC protocol SILC project does not propose that SILC protocol would
obsolete any IRC protocol specifications in the IETF.

Unless IESG has additional requests or requirements, the SILC project is
proposing the SILC protocol to be submitted as RFCs in the IETF outside
the standard working group procedures.  We hope that you introduce
yourself to the specifications listed at the start of this email to get
familiar with the protocol features and details.  Please note that some
known typographical errors exist in these drafts.

Additional Information

Should IESG need more information or introduction to the protocol the
following sources give more information:

- The SILC Project main site: http://silcnet.org/

- Introduction to the protocol: http://silcnet.org/general/about/

- SILC Protocol FAQ: http://silcnet.org/support/faq/protocol/

- SILC Protocol White Paper: http://silcnet.org/support/documentation/wp/

- Other SILC FAQs: http://silcnet.org/support/faq/

- All specifications: http://silcnet.org/support/documentation/specs/

About SILC Project

The SILC Project is a non-commercial voluntary based organization which
has been coordinating the SILC protocol development for the past four
years.  The goal of the project is to develop the SILC protocol and to
standardize it in the IETF.  The project also develops the reference
implementation of the protocol and provides it free of charge to the
public.  The SILC Project also coordinates the official SILC Network, its
development and maintenance.  The SILC Network provides users a public
and free access to SILC network and its services.

The IESG may contact me in any matters regarding this proposition.  I am
looking forward to here from you.

Best Regards,

	Pekka Riikonen / SILC Project
________________________________________________________________________
 Pekka Riikonen                                 priikone at silcnet.org
 Secure Internet Live Conferencing (SILC)       http://silcnet.org/

---------- End Forwarded Message ----------