[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Review requested: draft-ietf-radext-delegated-prefix-03.txt
A new version of the Delegated Prefix attribute has been posted to the
archive:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-radext-delegated-prefix-03.txt
This document has already gone through IESG review, so it is one step away
from publication.
Can people take a look at it?
I found one typo, in Section 5:
The AVP flag rules [5] for the Delegate-IPv6-Prefix attribute are:
+---------------------+
| AVP Flag rules |
|----+-----+----+-----|----+
AVP Section | | |SHLD| MUST| |
Attribute Name Code Defined Value Type |MUST| MAY | NOT| NOT|Encr|
-----------------------------------------|----+-----+----+-----|----|
Framed-IPv6- 97 6.11.6 OctetString| M | P | | V | Y |
Prefix | | | | | |
Here the attribute should be Delegated-IPv6-Prefix, not Framed-IPv6-Prefix;
the AVP should be TBD instead of 97, and the Section Defined entry should be
deleted.
One other quibble. In Section 1, it is stated:
" The Framed-IPv6-Prefix attribute [4] is not designed to carry an IPv6
prefix to be used in the user's network, and therefore Framed-IPv6-
Prefix and Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attributes may be included in the
same RADIUS packet."
It strikes me that this statement is not necessarily accurate. For example,
if a bridge device connected to a NAS, then in fact the Framed-IPv6-Prefix
attribute *could* be used to carry an IPv6 prefix to be used in the user's
network. However, if we are talking about a router, then this will not
work. So I think the sentence should be changed to:
" The Framed-IPv6-Prefix attribute [4] is not designed to support
delegation of prefixes to
be used in the user's network, and therefore Framed-IPv6-Prefix and
Delegated-IPv6-Prefix
attributes may be included in the same RADIUS packet."
--
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/>