|
From: Hi Kuntal, Comments inline. Regards, --behcet ----- Original Message
---- I don’t know at what stage we are in
with respect to this draft, but it seems that the draft lacks a description of
the use case that it is trying to address. The introduction seems to be
conveying very little about the motivation for this document: “ The Delegated-IPv6-Prefix is a RADIUS
attribute [1] that carries an IPv6 prefix to be delegated
to the user, for use in the user's network. “ Comment: Delegated-IPv6-Prefix is NOT a
RADIUS attribute that is defined in reference [1] i.e. RFC 2865. If it was, we
would not need this document. ==> True. So I suggest the
following fix: The Delegated-IPv6-Prefix is a new RADIUS
[1] attribute that carries an ... “ [KC>] Ok, but I still think referencing RFC 2865 in the
above sentence is odd. A _new_ attribute cannot be in an RFC
unless the RFC is revised. This is just an editorial nit, IMHO. For example, the prefix in a
Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute can be delegated to
another node through DHCP Prefix Delegation [2]. “ Comment: If prefix delegation by DHCP as
described in RFC 3633 already exists, then why we need another mechanism? RFC
3633 has figure 1 which shows the prefix delegation scenario. I request
that the authors clarify using this figure where the RADIUS transaction with
this attribute applies. ==> I think you missed the point
with this whole draft. [KC>] Since you seem to have understood the point in the
draft very well, why don’t you help me understand it? In RFC 3633 there
are several entities shown in fig 1, ISP, Aggregation Device (delegating
router), CPE (requesting router), and Subscriber PC. So, we need to know
how this RADIUS draft fits into this scenario. Where is the RADIUS Client? If
it is the Aggregation Device why is it outsourcing the prefix management to a
RADIUS server? What is the motivation for doing this? Is the motivation to
avoid prefix provisioning in the Aggregation Device? Does the Aggregation
Device have a NAS that performs user auth/authz. What is the user? Is it one of
the Customers PC or is it the CPE (requesting router)? The text in this draft SHOULD clarify the use case. -Kuntal From:
owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bernard Aboba In RADIUS/Diameter Accounting messages
announce both the beginning and end of a session. From: 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: Thanks, Behcet ----- Original Message
---- A new version of the Delegated Prefix attribute has been posted to the "This
email message and any attachments are confidential information of Starent
Networks, Corp. The information transmitted may not be used to create or change
any contractual obligations of Starent Networks, Corp. Any review,
retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in
reliance upon this e-mail and its attachments by persons or entities other than
the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,
please notify the sender immediately -- by replying to this message or by
sending an email to postmaster@starentnetworks.com -- and destroy all copies of
this message and any attachments without reading or disclosing their contents.
Thank you." |