RE: Scope of applicability for CUI

["Nelson, David" <dnelson@enterasys.com>]

Avi Lior writes...
 
> I am sure some of you folks are amuzed by the number of messages and
the
> circular nature that are being generated for an RFC with one
attribute.

I'm sure some are.  :-)

Maybe if we focused on thinking of CUI as an alternate form of User-Name
(just like User-Name, except for ...) instead of focusing on comparing
and contrasting CUI and Class, it would make the issues clearer.

Could we generically describe CUI as having the same format and syntax
as User-Name, with the difference being that User-Name originates from
the end-station (client of the NAS) when used in an Access-Request, has
"routing" semantics in Proxy deployments, and can be returned in an
Access-Accept with modified content, while CUI originates from the Home
AAA server, has no "routing" semantics, and cannot be modified.



--
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/>