RE: review of draft-ietf-radext-ieee802-01.txt

["Greg Weber \(gdweber\)" <gdweber@cisco.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bernard Aboba
> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 1:57 PM
> To: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: review of draft-ietf-radext-ieee802-01.txt
> 
> David Nelson writes:
> 
> >Given the ongoing work on RADIUS Design Guidelines to 
> encompass additional 
> >data types and foster greater compatibility with Diameter 
> AVPs, and the 
> >charter of the DIME WG, it is not inconceivable to come up 
> with a single 
> >"improved" filter
> >rule that would make RADIUS-Diameter attribute translation 
> much easier.
> >It would, however, in all likelihood delay this work for many months.
> >It seems to me we have to decide which we value more highly: a [more]
> >unified data model between RADIUS and Diameter or timely 
> delivery of the 
> >802-related extensions in RADIUS.
> 
> I'm not sure we have to choose.  We can split the document, 
> removing the 
> filter attributes and progressing the rest.  From what I can 
> see, there are 
> no open issues relating to the VLAN/Priority attributes, so 
> doing that could 
> enable the VLAN/Priority document to be sent to the IESG
> for review by IETF 65.

That sounds like a good idea to me.  It also nicely
resolves issue #110.

Greg

> Unless we think that we can resolve the Diameter and Design 
> Guidelines 
> issues by the submission deadline for IETF 65, I  don't see 
> what other paths 
> are available to completing this milestone in a timely way.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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/>
> 

--
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/>