Re: new Service-Type

[Victor Gamov <vit@lipetsk.ru>]

OK, let me explain my point of view.

As this I-D propose new Service-Type values it's means that IETF 
Consensus required. It's a real fact.
As to the question about only one implementation using this values so I 
propose this attributes because I really hope that it may be useful in 
environment where video services (like video-call or video-on-demand) 
are deployed.
As recommended by http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.html, chair of 
the WG must grant permissions to IETF to publish I-D. But I think that
the utility of this new values need to be discussed by RADext WG 
firstly.  If this values will be found helpful -- WG can recommend it 
for using in suitable situations and publish this I-D to get IETF 
Consensus.  If not -- WG can discard it.
If its needed to have more examples where this values may be used I will 
try to give it.
--
CU,
Victor Gamov

--
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/>