[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Sumary of feedback on draft-ietf-dhc-agentopt-radius-07.txt
OK thanks. Having text that suggests a possible solution will
(I hope/assume) help a lot in trying to come to resolution.
Thanks,
Bert
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nelson, David [mailto:dnelson@enterasys.com]
> Sent: zaterdag 24 juli 2004 00:14
> To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert); Bernard Aboba; aaa-doctors@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Sumary of feedback on
> draft-ietf-dhc-agentopt-radius-07.txt
>
>
> Bert Wijnen writes...
>
> > So must the 3 issues be resolved before we can consider
> this documenty
> > "a reasonable basis..."
>
> My opinion is that these issues SHOULD be resolved.
>
> Issues (1) and (2) could be resolved by adding text that specifically
> restricts the scope of applicability of the specification such that
> interoperability is only obtained (in any robust fashion) in the same
> scope as DHCP itself, i.e. within a single, localized administrative
> domain. This change will not improve global interoperability of the
> specification, but it will at least correctly set expectations for
> limited, local interoperability.
>
> Issue (3) can be resolved by clarifying (or emphasizing) that the text
> "The RADIUS server that implements this specification MUST be
> configured
> to return the User-Name and Class attributes to the NAS, and
> MAY return
> other attributes." does not modify RFC2865, since the requirement only
> applies to a "server that implements this specification".
>
> > > Issue Title Status
> > > ------ ----- ------
> > >
> > > 1 Negotiation Open
> > > 2 Truncation Open
> > > 3 Normative Language Open
> > > 4 Conflicts Resolved in -07
> > > 5 Compatibility Resolved in -07
> > > 6 Authz Lifetime Resolved in -07
> > > 7 Correlation Resolved in -07
> > > 8 New Attribute Resolved in -07
> > > 9 Editorial Issues Resolved in -07
>