Re: [IANA #85318] request a new NAS-Port-Type for XPON (fwd)

[Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>]

Paul Congdon forwarded the IANA request to IEEE 802.1 for comment.  Here is one of the comments that came back. 

 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glen Kramer [mailto:glen.kramer@teknovus.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 5:04 PM
> To: Pat Thaler
> Cc: Congdon, Paul T (ProCurve); Grow, Bob; David Law; Steve Carlson;
> Wael Diab
> Subject: RE: [802.1 - 2683] FW: [IANA #85318] request a new
> NAS-Port-Type for XPON
> 
> Pat,
> 
> Is this a formal liaison request? .3av focuses on PHY and I am not sure
> we have the right expertise in our group to answer this. I think MacSec
> may be a better place to get a meaningful response.
> 
> Unofficially, I asked an engineer in my company for his opinion. Here it
> is:
> 
> ***
> This field isn't really a functional part of the protocol. It's just
> management information. In a RADIUS access request, there is a "port
> type" field that says "I'm a DSL port" or "I'm a cable port" or "I'm a
> PON port". This has nothing to do with the actual authentication, and
> I'm not even sure why a RADIUS server would care in the first place.
> But given that there's a list of 34 possible port types, it makes sense
> to add one (or more) for PON. 
> 
> It may be that people will want to distinguish various types of PON.
> There's a bunch of ADSL port types (DMT, CAP, etc) in addition to a
> generic xDSL port type. But we can start with xPON and see if people
> really want to know that it's specifically EPON or GEPON or whatever.
> 
> It's not clear what the NAS port number would be. The protocol defines
> a port value as a 32-bit field. This isn't big enough for a MAC
> address. But since the logical links are virtual and dynamically
> assigned, it doesn't make lots of sense to me to report a link as either
> "link index 12" or "LLID 13". Those values will just be different after
> the next reset; so, there's nothing useful you can provision or check on
> the server side; so, it doesn't really matter what the value is, so
> there's no point in having a value in the first place. (Note that there
> is a NAS-Port-Type of "virtual", which is intended for virtual ports
> multiplexed over some transport medium. Perhaps it's enough to realize
> that port type "xPON" means that the port number won't have lasting
> value.)
> ***
> 
> Let me know, if anything is required from .3av in this regard.
> 
> Glen
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: IEEE 802.1 list HELP only [mailto:hdk-105.xtvbd_h22q10g@att.net]
> > On Behalf Of Congdon, Paul T (ProCurve)
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 5:29 AM
> > To: STDS-802-1-L@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: [802.1 - 2683] FW: [IANA #85318] request a new NAS-Port-Type 
> > for XPON
> > 
> > Would anyone from IEEE 802.1 like to provide a comment here or perhaps
> 
> > pass onto the appropriate 802.3 contacts. The Radius group could 
> > benefit from a description of how this port-type might be used in AAA 
> > exchanges.
> > 
> > Paul
> > 
> > ________________________________
> > 
> > From: owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> [mailto:owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org]
> > On Behalf Of Bernard Aboba
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:37 PM
> > To: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> > Subject: FW: [IANA #85318] request a new NAS-Port-Type for XPON
> > 
> > 
> > IANA has received a request for allocation of a NAS-Port-Type value
> for
> > XPON. Comments?
> > 
> > 
> > > Subject: [IANA #85318] request a new NAS-Port-Type for XPON
> > > From: iana-prot-param-comment@icann.org
> > > CC: bernard_aboba@hotmail.com
> > > Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:47:07 -0700
> > >
> > > Dear Bernard,
> > >
> > > Can you advise on this request for a new NAS-Port-Type value?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Amanda Baber
> > > IANA
> > >
> > > On Mon Jun 11 19:57:38 2007, Renxiang.Yan@alcatel-sbell.com.cn
> wrote:
> > > > Dear editor,
> > > >
> > > > We believed it lacks a RADIUS NAS-Port-Type for PON (Passive
> Optical
> > > > Network) access.
> > > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/radius-types
> > > >
> > > > Could you please check and allocate one for it?
> > > >
> > > > Recommended value:
> > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > > value description
> > > > 35 xPON - Passive Optical Network
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > (xPON may cover: Broadband PON (B-PON/G.983.x), Gigabit PON 
> > > > (G-PON/G.984.x), and Ethernet PON (E-PON/IEEE 802.3ah).)
> > > >
> > > > Kindly regards,
> > > >
> > > > Renxiang