[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RFC 3576bis Comments
Some comments on draft-ietf-radext-dynauth-client-mib-01.txt. Most of
these comments also apply to the dynauth-server-mib document.
The initial sections could use some re-organization. My suggestion is to
start the document with Section 2 - Introduction. Section 1
(Requirements) would become Section 1.1, and Terminology would become
Section 1.2.
Section 2 (Introduction) refers to RFC 2619 and 2621. It should also
probably refer to the RFC 2619bis and RFC 2621bis documents.
To address some of the terminology confusion, my suggestion is that the
Terminology section be rewritten as follows:
"1.2 Terminology
Dynamic Authorization Server (DAS)
The component that resides on the NAS which processes the
Disconnect and Change-of-Authorization (CoA) Request packets
[RFC3576] sent by the Dynamic Authorization Client.
Dynamic Authorization Client (DAC)
The component which sends Disconnect and CoA-Request packets
to the Dynamic Authorization Server. While often residing on the
RADIUS server, it is also possible for this component to
be located on a separate host, such as a Rating Engine.
Dynamic Authorization Server Port
The UDP port on which the Dynamic Authorization server listens for
the Disconnect and CoA requests sent by the Dynamic Authorization
Client."
Section 5
Rewrite the first paragraph:
"5. Overview
"Dynamic Authorization Extensions to RADIUS" [RFC3576] defines
the operation of Disconnect-Request, Disconnect-ACK, Disconnect-NAK,
CoA-Request, CoA-ACK and CoA-NAK packets. [DYNSERV] defines the
Dynamic Authorization Server MIB and the relationship with other
MIB modules. This MIB module for the Dynamic Authorization
Client contains the following:"
Capitalization
The term "authenticator" is inconsistently capitalized.
--
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/>