Bernard Aboba wrote:
> Section 2.6
>
> Where a NAS offers multiple services, confusion may result with
> respect to interpretation of a Disconnect-Request [RFC3576]. In
> order to prevent confusion a RADIUS Server SHOULD identify the
> session that it desires to terminate as specifically as possible.
> For example, an Acct-Session-Id attribute SHOULD be included in
> Disconnect-Request and CoA-Request packets, rather than just the
> User-Name attribute.
>
> I think this material might better belong in RFC 3576bis.
I have no objections. We should therefore remove references to RFC
3576 from the document, as that paragraph contains the only textual
reference to that document.
...
> You might include a reference to the RADIUS Prefix Delegation document
> (now in the RFC Editor Queue).
OK.
> It appears that the Framed-IPv6-Prefix is used for the link between
> the NAS and CPE only if a /64 prefix is assigned. When a larger
> prefix is sent, the intent is for the NAS to send a routing
> advertisement containing the information present in the Framed-
> IPv6-Prefix attribute.
>
> Even if a /64 prefix is assigned, I think that the NAS is expected
> to send an RA to the CPE, no? Otherwise I'm not sure how the CPE
> could learn the prefix.
I believe so, yes.
> The other issue is how the CPE obtains a prefix to use for its own
> network, in the case that the CPE is decrementing TTL. Prefix
> Delegation is the mechanism created for that purpose. If the CPE
> is acting as a Bridge or ND-Proxy, then it does not need to request
> that a prefix be delegated. It might make sense to say a few words
> about this.
I will add a sentence about this.