[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: IPv6

Bernard Aboba wrote:
> How about this?
...
>    For these reasons, the tagging scheme described in RFC 2868 is
>    not suitable for use as a generic grouping mechanism.  Where
>    a tagging scheme is required for use with arbitrary data types,
>    it is RECOMMENDED that:
>       
>         * A fixed tagging field be used so as to remove potential
>           interoperability issues associated with determining whether
>           an optional tag is present; 
> 
>         * The design make no assumption about the content of the
>           data within tagged attributes."  

  Hmm... OK.  This sounds an awful lot like making recommendations on
later RADEXT documents.  I'm not sure that's useful.

  The alternative is to interpret this as recommending a new data type:
tagged attributes with a format defined outside of RADEXT.  I'm not sure
I like that much better.

  Alan DeKok.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>