[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Issue: Attribute restriction
Bernard,
Dont forget that in
RADIUS Location Draft we want to include location information in this
message.
Recall, that if the
NAS provided location information in an Access-Request (either because it was
configured to do so, or because it received a challenge) then when issueing the
Access-Request due to the receipt of COA (Authorize-Only) we want it to also
include the location information. Thus this will avoid the AAA server from
challenging it again to provide location information.
How do you want to deal
with that? Do we let that Draft specify this or do you want to align the
draft.
Issue: Attribute Restriction
Submitter name: Bernard
Aboba
Submitter email address: aboba@internaut.com
Date first submitted:
May 26, 2007
Reference:
Document: RFC3576bis-06
Comment type:
Technical
Priority: S
Section: 3.2
Rationale/Explanation of
issue:
Section 3.2 contains the following sentence:
This Access-Request SHOULD contain the NAS
identification attributes from the CoA-Request, as well as the
session identification attributes from the CoA-Request legal for
inclusion in an Access-Request as specified in [RFC2865], [RFC2868],
[RFC2869] and [RFC3162].
This sentence appears to imply that only session identification attributes
from [RFC2865], [RFC2868], [RFC2869] and [RFC3162] can be included in the
Access-Request. In fact, RFC 3576bis adds Chargeable-User-Identity to the
list of session identification attributes; this is defined in a document
that is not listed.
The proposed resolution is to change this sentence to:
This Access-Request SHOULD contain the NAS
identification attributes from the CoA-Request, as well as the
session identification attributes from the CoA-Request legal for
inclusion in an Access-Request.