[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New Technical Issues RE: WG last call in progress on VLAN/Priority Draft
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 05:33:48PM -0500, Nelson, David wrote:
> Emile van Bergen writes...
> > Eg. the number of hours, minutes and seconds that a session lasted are
> > so closely related that we decided to do all kinds of bad, bad magic
> > to those 3 values and pack them together into one attribute:
> > Acct-Session-Time.
> I think perhaps you are making a jest at my expense. That's fine; I
> have a thick skin.
It was half serious. What I'm after is to find out at which point you
would start to agree that certain things are better only taken together.
My small joke at your expense attempted to gauge how far we need to go
before reaching common ground, but you sadly, you rejected my attempt.
> > If all packing is bad, I suppose you also consider /that/ attribute a
> > candidate for a complex data type as well? No?
> > Why not?
> Because RFC 2865 defines a time as a base data type:
We're having a theoretical debate, and you're not answering the
question. Let me try again. If RFC 2865 didn't have a time base type,
how would you propose a session time to be conveyed? As an attribute
consisting of subattributes allocated from a global IANA Type number
space, however wide?
No? Why not?
E-Advies - Emile van Bergen firstname.lastname@example.org
tel. +31 (0)78 6136282 http://www.e-advies.nl
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.