RE: AAAEXT charter, Take 1

[<john.loughney@nokia.com>]

Richard,

> Personally, I'd like to keep the work separate.  There is certainly good
> reason for the work on DIAMETER and RADIUS futures to coordinate with each
> other, but I think the actual WGs should be separate.
> 
> One good reason is to avoid endless battles over whether a certain extension
> should be in D, R or both.  Let each group work out the best path, that is
> consistent with overall IETF/IESG direction.

There is no Diameter WG.  The current AAA WG is shutting down.  I think
what we are talking about is not debating where extensions belong, but
how to manage interworking between RADIUS & Diameter.  One example would
be the WLAN extentions.  It would make sense that RADIUS WLAN extensions
interworking with Diameter servers, for example.  Additionally, things
like the NAI update document is not specific to RADIUS or Diameter, but
is a common AAA topic.

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/>