RE: REMINDER: RADEXT WG Last Call on RFC 3576bis

["Bernard Aboba" <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>]

You are right.  There is no good reason to support Service-Type = 
Authorize-Only for a Disconnect-Request.  As you point out, it isn't needed 
for Diameter compatibility (in fact, it would complicate things).  Also, 
what if the RADIUS server doesn't send an Access-Reject in response to the 
Access-Request?  Then it would function just like a CoA-Request.

Assuming that there are no objections,  it might be a good idea to remove 
this.

> Forgive me for asking a potentially stupid question but why is
> Service-Type = Authorise-Only required Disconnect Message?
>
> I can see the use of it in Change of Authorization but why in Disconnect
> Message?
>
> There is a direct command that goes from the Server to the Client in
> Diameter and that would map directly to the Disconnect Message sent from
> the Server to the Client. Why do we need the Service-Type =
> Authorize-Only semantics?  It doesn't make sense.



--
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/>