Extensibility of draft-ietf-radext-filter-rules

[Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net>]

Hi all,

I have a question regarding the extensibility of 
draft-ietf-radext-filter-rules.
The document states that there is a version field. Now, there is the 
question when and how you define new versions.
* Does every tiny extension demand a new version number?

* Since a new version number is just a new constant in the rule set and 
does not require a new AVP are there IANA actions associated with the 
definition of new extensions?
* Does an extension (e.g., a new action) then require the document 
author to copy-and-paste the entire ABNF with the enhancements or would 
it be more preferable to just place the modified snippet into a new 
document? What would you suggest?
For example, one could just put the following modified ip-filter-rule 
code snippet into a doc:
        ;IP Filter Rule
        ip-filter-rule =  ("permit" / "deny" / NEW-ACTION ) " "
                                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                          ("in" / "out" / "inout") " "
                          ("ip" / ip-proto) filter-body 
                          [" " ip-option] [" " log-rule]

Wouldn't it be necessary or useful to carry the version number also 
attached to the capability attribute from the NAS to the RADIUS server?
Ciao
Hannes


--
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/>