RE: Strawman RADIUSEXT WG charter - Take Three

[Mark Jones <mark.jones@bridgewatersystems.com>]

> - No RADIUS "sub-types" will be defined.

I do not understand how introducing new sub-types or data types impacts
backwards compatibility anymore than permitting the addition of new
attributes.

Any new data types would only apply to new attributes. A RADIUS
client/server either has these attributes in its data dictionary or it
doesn't. If it doesn't, it is free to ignore them. How is this different
from the introduction of IPv6 addresses in RFC2162?

> - No "attribute grouping" mechanism will be defined.

As it stands, new data types are being defined and each one requires new
encode/decode routines to be implemented in client and server. Many of these
new attributes are simply groupings of attributes of existing data types.

If RADIUS had a defined mechanism for grouping attributes, most of the
non-standard 3GPP/3GPP2 attribute data types could have been defined as
groups of attributes. I agree wholeheartedly that we should not be
re-inventing the wheel on this. Diameter already has grouped attributes so
we should follow the same approach.

Mark


--
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/>