Re: RADEXT charter for comment...

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

Bernard wrote:

> In the interest of focus, I think it would be ok to have a separate
> Diameter document.  Is there a volunteer to write that document?

I don't think focus should override the technically right way
to do things, particularly when...

Avi wrote:

> And finally, wouldnt NASREQ automatically handle the WLAN RADIUS attributes?

Right. It does. At least for 99.9% of the cases. The remaining
0.1% is designing something in RADIUS which already exists
in some other form in Diameter, and making the translation
difficult.

So I think that one document leads to exactly one way to
do things, one set of information, and less industry
fragmentation.

I and others have previously agreed to review these documents
and provide Diameter guidance (if needed). So I don't think
lack of Diameter understanding should be a problem in developing
the WLAN documents. If there's any problem in developing these
documents, it may be agreement on exactly what information
needs to be carried, but that's another issue...

--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/>