RE: Subtypes

[<john.loughney@nokia.com>]

Hi Avi,

> I don't disagree with you at all John.
> 
> But lets not get tangled up on philosophical points and 
> political points.

I agree, that was my point.
 
> Subtypes are not that bad....they don't really break anything, they do
> create work if an intermediary had to add value by looking at some of the
> subtypes.  And given that there are subtypes both in VSAs and lets see
> parsing username to extract subtypes (ummmm data).  The code exists in
> probably every RADIUS server made today to do this.  So its not a big
> change.

Well, my point is that the current stuff will probably change if
RADext is chartered - we cannot expect that the current stuff
will just be rubber stamped.  I think adding support for subtypes will 
change RADIUS.  It is then reasonable to provide further justification
why these changes are good and how it will impact existing RADIUS
standards and deployment.  Will these changes be backwards compatible?
I don't think that it is sufficient to say that there are existing 
vendor extentions so we should support them.

thanks,
John

--
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/>