In RADIUS/Diameter Accounting messages
announce both the beginning and end of a session.
From: Behcet Sarikaya
[mailto:behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006
2:05 PM
To: Bernard Aboba
Cc: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: Review requested:
draft-ietf-radext-delegated-prefix-03.txt
Hello Bernard, I agree with your changes, please also add
this typo too:
The AVP flag rules [5] for the Delegate-IPv6-Prefix
attribute are:
->The AVP flag rules [5] for the Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute are:
Is session termination communicated with Accounting Request message in
Radius/Diameter?
----- Original Message
----
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
To: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
Sent: Tuesday, October
3, 2006 3:21:42 PM
Subject: 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/>
|