[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Last Look" at the RADIUS Design Guidelines document
----- Original Message ----
> From: Alan DeKok <email@example.com>
> To: Avi Lior <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Cc: Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) <email@example.com>; Bernard Aboba <firstname.lastname@example.org>; "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Wed, January 6, 2010 2:54:24 PM
> Subject: Re: "Last Look" at the RADIUS Design Guidelines document
> Avi Lior wrote:
> > Great!!!! But this also creates confusion. Because what is RADIUS.....
> > IETF publishes a document that says its BAD to do something if it is RADIUS
> and not bad if it is not RADIUS --- then it better define what is meant by
> RADIUS. Otherwise I have to live with the debate for the rest of my SDO life.
> The guidelines document says "SDOs do whatever the heck they want".
> If this isn't clear, we can put it in 50pt blinking neon text.
With this, I think that Radext is going to become the WG (possibly the only one) that does not care about SDOs.
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.