RE: new Service-Type

["David B. Nelson" <dnelson@elbrysnetworks.com>]

Avi Lior writes...

> In my opinion Service-Type is really broken when it comes to requesting
> and authorizing services.

Perhaps "broken" is too strong a word.

> First and foremost only one instance of Service-Type is allowed in a
> radius packet.  Therefore a client that is requesting multiple services,
> for example IP service, Voice Service, Video Streaming etc., would have
> to issue multiple requests...

It is true that the design of RADIUS was targeted at provisioning exactly
one service at a time.  It is possible to provision different services, on
different "ports" using multiple access requests, or to change or add
services using CoA requests.  It's also true that there is no generally
accepted notion of sub-sessions (multiple services on a main access
session).  But then RADIUS was originally designed for Terminal Servers.

> I am not objecting to the allocation of Service-Type but I am wondering
> what the utility of using it for the purpose that you state.

It might be helpful to have a more detailed use case description in the ID
that specified these proposed values of Service-Type.



--
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/>