[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Review of draft-ietf-radext-fixes-00.txt

To: <radiusext@ops.ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Review of draft-ietf-radext-fixes-00.txt
From: "David B. Nelson" <d.b.nelson@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 08:26:36 -0500
In-reply-to: <20070122123543.8D91C16D7C@mail.nitros9.org>
References: Your message of "Tue, 16 Jan 2007 18:11:59 PST." <BAY117-F25981F4020DDCA81F2F90C93AB0@phx.gbl> <20070122123543.8D91C16D7C@mail.nitros9.org>

Alan DeKok writes...

>   Issue 146 is (I believe) addressed in the updated MIB
> documents. The issue itself lists 'Document: RFC2618bis-2621bis',
> so I don't think it's relevant for Issues & Fixes.

That's not quite correct.  The WG chose to not address this issue in the
revised MIBs, because of the undesirability of deprecating the corresponding
objects in widely deployed MIBs, especially since there was not consensus
that the existing description was really in error.  We decided to discuss
the issue, i.e. the potential for confusion, in the Issues and Fixes
document.




--
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/>

References:
- Review of draft-ietf-radext-fixes-00.txt
  - From: "Bernard Aboba" <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-radext-fixes-00.txt
  - From: "Alan DeKok" <aland@nitros9.org>

Prev by Date: Re: Review of draft-ietf-radext-fixes-00.txt
Next by Date: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-radext-rfc3576bis-00.txt
Previous by thread: Re: Review of draft-ietf-radext-fixes-00.txt
Next by thread: Re: Review of draft-ietf-radext-fixes-00.txt
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread