RE: RADIUS V2

[Avi Lior <avi@bridgewatersystems.com>]

Oh one more thing Bernard - I am not interested in RADIUS V2.

My point is that reading the list one would get the impression that others
are.

They are either using the Guidelines and associated threads as delaying
tactic or are truly beilvers that RADIUS needs to be fixed for its long life
going forward.

Which is it?

If we belive that RADIUS has a long life going forward.  Lets do the work
right.  That is my point.


Avi

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bernard Aboba [mailto:aboba@internaut.com] 
> Sent: June 12, 2004 10:27 AM
> To: Avi Lior
> Cc: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: RADIUS V2
> 
> 
> If you're interested in designing a new AAA protocol, I 
> suggest you request a BOF at IETF 60 for that purpose.
> 
> Designing RADIUSv2 is not within the scope of the RADEXT WG Charter.
> 
> On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Avi Lior wrote:
> 
> >
> > 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!!!
> >
> >
> >
> 

--
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/>