RE: [Dime] RE: RADEXT Agenda for IETF65, Take Two

[<john.loughney@nokia.com>]

David,

My opinion is:

>> One of the items on the DIME WG agenda will probably be RFC 3588bis, 
>> which includes the definition of the NAS-Filter-Rule syntax.
>> However, the DIME WG milestones involve bringing RFC 3588 to Draft 
>> Standard, which typically precludes addition of new features.
>
>Does that mean that DIME has to choose between advancing to 
>the base Diameter protocol to DS and maintaining compatibility 
>with RADIUS Extensions?  Both are charter items for DIME.  
>Tough choice.
>
>I think it would be a mistake for RADEXT to standardize a 
>non-interoperable extension to NAS-Filter-Rule, and that our 
>charter requirement of maintaining Diameter compatibility 
>would potentially preclude such action, in any event.

Better to do what is correct.  The DiME wg would like feedback about
the NAS-Filter-Rule - is the communitity happy with the current
definition,
or does it want to be improved or changed.

John

--
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/>