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

Re: Issue 226: RFC 3576bis and Renumbering

To: <radiusext@ops.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Issue 226: RFC 3576bis and Renumbering
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 23:12:42 -0700

The problem described in this issue is that a CoA-Request packet cannot be used for renumbering. This is because RFC 3576 defines the Framed-IP-Address, Framed-IPv6-Prefix and Framed-Interface-Id attributes as session identification attributes.

RFC 3576bis-04 advocates use of the Service-Type value of "Authorize-Only" in order to enable renumbering.

It has been pointed out that this is inefficient, requiring two exchanges (a CoA-Request/CoA-ACK and then an Access-Request/Access-Accept) when only one should be required.

I'd like to put forward a potential approach to address this concern, which is to introduce two new attributes, User-IPv4-Address and User-IPv6-Address, in order to identify a session by IP address. This would allow the Framed-IP-Address, Framed-IPv6-Prefix, Framed-Interface-Id and Delegated-IPv6-Address attributes to be included for the purpose of renumbering.

Comments?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Issue 226: RFC 3576bis and Renumbering
  - From: Alan DeKok <aland@nitros9.org>

Prev by Date: RFC 3576bis Open Issues
Next by Date: Re: Issue 226: RFC 3576bis and Renumbering
Previous by thread: RFC 3576bis Open Issues
Next by thread: Re: Issue 226: RFC 3576bis and Renumbering
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread