[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
you are fully right. we have also identified this as an issue. i think we
should also think about size considerations in the geopriv working group.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Schnizlein [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 7:12 PM
> To: Tschofenig Hannes
> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
> Subject: draft-jones-radius-geopriv
> Including the GeoPriv WG..
> One concern, if this location configuration information (LCI)
> is to be carried over RADIUS, is that the example in section 6
> seems to be 993 characters long. This one attribute seems to be
> taking a large share of the maximum RADIUS packet size of 4096.
> [RFC 2865, p 15] Is there enough room for everything else that
> would be expected with this attribute?
> At 12:05 PM 2/10/2004, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
> >you can find the geogriv/radius draft at:
> >the draft tries awareness for privacy and reuses results of
> the geopriv
> >working group.
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.