RE: RADIUS V2

[Avi Lior <avi@bridgewatersystems.com>]

Title: Message

If that is true John then why are we talking about some of these attributes?

 

I want to do the necessary work in RADIUS and not introduce new Attribute Types and Spaces. 

 

Why are  talking about Guidelines etc at this stage of RADIUS?

 

Is this a delaying tactic? Or are people wanting to improve RADIUS?

 

If so then do it right, address other issues (which are more imporant).  That is my point.

 

And by the way RADIUS V2 is not Diameter.  Diameter is a totally new protocol.  RADIUS V2 wouldn't be so radical a change.

 

Avi

-----Original Message-----
From: john.loughney@nokia.com [mailto:john.loughney@nokia.com]
Sent: June 12, 2004 9:45 AM
To: avi@bridgewatersystems.com; radiusext@ops.ietf.org
Subject: RE: RADIUS V2

Avi,

 

Since it seems by the traffic on the list -- if we need a "fresh start"  the lets do it right folks.

 

I propose that we create RADIUS V2 and that we include the new attribute proposed by Jari and do some other good things as well.  After all, reading the list one would get the impression that RADIUS will live a long time. 

 

Like a Phoenix RADIUS seems to have risen from the ashes.  I therefore propose that we call this version of RADIUS -- RADIUS Phoenix!!! 

 

Didn't the IETF try this before?  I thought RADIUSv2 = Diameter ... 

 

John