[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: review of draft-ietf-radext-ieee802-01.txt
Yes, this one fell through the cracks. Are there any suggestions in
terms of names? How about something like NAS-Traffic-Rule or perhaps
to reduce confusion possibility drop the 'NAS-' prefix and just call it
'Traffic-Rule'?
Before we start inventing new names, do you guys remember
why we decided in IETF-64 that the second approach, a
different attribute, was the right one? I'm hoping it was
not me who argued for that, but can't remember the
discussion at all...
The reason I dislike new attributes because if we
do it on every extension, we'll end up with a messy
attribute set. From a RADIUS point of view this is
a new attribute now, but not from Diameter. What happens
when you do the next filter extension -- which IMHO seems
likely? Yet another attribute? I hope not.
--Jari
--
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/>