[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Review of draft-ietf-radext-vlan-02.txt
another issue that came to my mind again was raised during the
discussion with Bernard is that the User-Priority-Table is used for
remapping of user priorities only according to the User Priority
Regeneration table. The conclusion of our discussion was that your draft
does not aim to attemp to associate the actual data traffic with the QoS
Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
thanks for responding to this issue. Please find my response below:
your new text proposal looks much better.
You need to modify Section 3 as well:
Access- Access- Access- Access- CoA-
Request Accept Reject Challenge Req # Attribute
0 0-1 0 0 0-1 TBD
Got it. BTW, do you think that *any* of the attributes are
appropriate for inclusion in an Accounting-Request?
An argument to allow these attributes in an Accounting-Request is for
forensic purposes. The accounting server is already aggregating a
number of session characteristics (packet/byte counts) and allowing
attributes from the vlan draft would shed additional light on the what
specific services the user was consuming/using at a given point in time.
Assume that you carry the User-Priority-Table within Accounting-Request
messages. Do you think that it provides information how many packets are
carried for each individual QoS class? Where is the information that
offers me the following info:
- # packets/bytes for user priority 0
- # packets/bytes for user priority 7
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.