General comments on the LAN attributes work

[Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>]

1) The world has evolved a lot since the RADIUS attributes
   were defined, as we mainly had dial-in in mind back then.
   New link layers, their new capabilities, and roaming imply
   that there is a need for new AAA attributes as well. I support
   extension work to define such attributes.

2) Most of the proposed new functions are valid. Not quite
   sure about _all_ them, such as capabilities negotiation for
   RADIUS.

3) Almost everything in the drafts that I read applies to
   both Diameter and RADIUS. There were a few exceptions, such
   as some attributes which already existed in RADIUS. I believe
   it would be a serious design mistake to make the drafts apply
   just for RADIUS. As these functions are mainly about new attributes,
   they should be documented in such a way that they apply to
   both Diameter and RADIUS. Please make it so. In one draft.

   There may be a few cases where translation becomes an issue.
   If so, those need to be documented. But there is simply no
   excuse to making this work RADIUS-specific.

4) It may be worthwhile to think about the organization of
   the attribute definitions into different documents, if
   we get to standardizing them. Some of this stuff is
   more general than LAN.

   Personally, I'd prefer a set of multiple smaller specifications.
   Say, an RFC on location attributes for AAA. I think we could
   get them done sooner and it would be easier for vendors to
   document what they support.

--Jari



--
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/>