RE: Comments on the draft-ietf-radext-filter-04 or.. -05

[<Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com>]

Bernard Aboba wrote:

> >Just a small note/question regarding the text stating Filter-ID and
> >NAS-Filter-Rule must not appear in the same message. I don't see
> >this kind of "must" restriction on Diameter side (RFC4005) so why
> >should RADIUS have it?
> 
> Right.  Diameter allows both Filter-ID and NAS-Filter-Rule 
> AVPs, so adding a usage restriction within RADIUS might result in 
> a Diameter -> RADIUS translation issue.

RFC4005 does not define how using both of them would actually work 
(e.g. which is applied first).... so IMHO we could keep the
restriction.

Best regards,
Pasi

--
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/>