RE: Bof at next IETF?

[Bernard Aboba <aboba@internaut.com>]

> I would second that there is interest for the work done in RADIUSEXT.
> For example GSMA would most probably like to see several of these worked
> on drafts progress get eventually done. For
> example draft-adrangi-radius-extension-for-pwlan,
> draft-adrangi-radiusext-location-information and
> draft-adrangi-radius-chargeable-user-identity-attribute (which is worked
> on in background at the moment) are such to name few.

Has there been any official communication from the GSMA to the  IETF on
this subject?  We are trying to understand to what extend drafts under
consideration in RADEXT have ended up on the dependency list of
an SDO, including 3GPP, 3GPP2, or IEEE 802.

This is an important issue, since one of the principles of governing AAA
work in the IETF is that there needs to be a demonstrated need, as
evidenced by SDO dependencies, requirements documents authored by existing
IETF WGs, etc.

--
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/>