[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: FW: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-radext-delegated-prefix
- To: "Bernard Aboba" <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>, <dnelson@enterasys.com>, <radiusext@ops.ietf.org>
- Subject: RE: FW: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-radext-delegated-prefix
- From: "Glen Zorn \(gwz\)" <gwz@cisco.com>
- Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 19:46:05 -0700
- Authentication-results: sj-dkim-3.cisco.com; header.From=gwz@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com verified; );
- Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=846; t=1149993971; x=1150857971; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim3001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=gwz@cisco.com; z=From:=22Glen=20Zorn=20\(gwz\)=22=20<gwz@cisco.com> |Subject:RE=3A=20FW=3A=20DISCUSS=3A=20draft-ietf-radext-delegated-prefix; X=v=3Dcisco.com=3B=20h=3DqAJfoDG5CV+fSokqMqi7H+mAHgg=3D; b=EG+UN1qXQ5m0yqGUlYOCTdSFQ/y1FXJzKUINSD3dp4jJR2jarf6Fd6X4bok52NvJXJ+vC5+m S1dPLLrmrWsOppyYcNQvdeN0hbg9OB4edIW6l2zeFysRBicT7I2Xzpus;
Bernard Aboba <> supposedly scribbled:
>> This IESG DISCUSS comment from Russ applies equally to all RADEXT WG
>> documents that provide for Diameter AVPs, whether by the RFC 4005
>> Diameter NAS Application method, or by some other explicit means. We
>> need to develop a suitable chunk of template text for the Security
>> Considerations section of RADEXT WG documents to address Diameter
>> security considerations, as well as RADIUS security considerations.
>
> I don't believe there are any substantial differences in the security
> implications of these attributes in RADIUS vs. Diameter, and I'd
> suggest that the document say this and leave it at that.
I agree.
Hope this helps,
~gwz
Why is it that most of the world's problems can't be solved by simply
listening to John Coltrane? -- Henry Gabriel
--
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/>