RE: Strawman RADIUSEXT WG charter - Take Two

["Glen Zorn" <gwz@cisco.com>]

Nelson, David <mailto:dnelson@enterasys.com> writes:

...

> I don't know how to judge whether it's a contradiction, but (IMHO) it
> certainly isn't a conflict of interest.  The latter would imply that
> actions and decisions in one WG would be adversely influenced by the
> best interests of another.  That's not the way in which I view the
> proposed RADIUSEXT WG.  

The _existence_ of the radiusext WG would adversely effect the work of
the aaa WG, as well as the deployment of Diameter; I think that to
suggest otherwise is naïve at best.  To use your example of IPv6 vs.
IPv4, do you think that if someone proposed a backward-compatible way to
extend the v4 address space to 128 bits that that would be a boon to
IPv6?
  
> 
> Yes, Diameter is intended to replace RADIUS, much in the same way
> that same way that IPv6 is intended to replace IPv4.  Recently,
> however, the Internet community has been speaking about IPv4 / IPv6
> co-existence more than it is speaking about transition or
> replacement.  I think we can take this approach with RADIUS.  RADIUS
> will likely continue to be used in problem spaces where it is
> sufficiently useful.  When the problem space requires the additional
> flexibility and features of Diameter, that's what will likely be
> deployed.   

If that was true, we wouldn't be having this conversation: the only
justification for this WG would be that RADIUS in its present form is
_not_ sufficiently useful in problem spaces where people want or need to
use it.
    
> 
> The only question that I think needs to be answered here is whether
> there is a valid need for a limited set of extensions to RADIUS, in
> the existing protocol framework, that will not substantially
> duplicate the features of Diameter.   

Too late.  In my mind the real question whether we will have two broken,
inadequate AAA protocols (as now) or only one.  I really don't care
which one gets fixed, but given the IESG's ongoing & steadfast
opposition to Diameter maybe RADIUS is the best choice.

> 
> -- Dave

Hope this helps,

~gwz

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither..." 
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759

"It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless
they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets." 
-- Voltaire



--
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/>