[Issue] Tag option in VLAN attributes

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

Description of issue: Tag option in VLAN attributes
Submitter name: Greg Weber
Submitter email address: gdweber@cisco.com
Date first submitted: February 2, 2006
Reference: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext/2006/msg00090.html
Document: IEEE802-01
Comment type: Technical
Priority: S
Section: 2.1, 2.3
Rationale/Explanation of issue:

The Egress-VLANID attribute proposed in Section 2.1 
is defined as data type "Integer":

   0                   1                   2                   3 
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
  |     Type      |    Length     |  Tag Option   |   Pad (12-bit)

  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    Pad   |    VLANID (12-bit)    |  
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 

I think this is going to be confusing because it similar
formatting to the 'tagging mechanism' defined in RFC 2868.
Also wondering if it's possible to not overload a single
integer with two values?  Won't this make configuring the
value on the server more difficult.  Can each VLAN have 
an independent tagged/untagged value?  Why are 0x31 & 0x32 
used?  

Requested change:
At least, I'd suggest changing "Tag Option" to "VLAN Tag"
or something like that.  Guess I'd have to understand
this better to suggest if the Tag and ID can be separated.

--
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/>