RE: comments on draft-gaonkar-radext-erp-attrs-00

["Narayanan, Vidya" <vidyan@qualcomm.com>]

> > 
> > The point I was making was that evolving link layers can certainly 
> > include this functionality.
> 
> If the people evolving those link layers are a) paying any 
> attention at all to what we're doing, b) are as willing as we 
> seem to be to depend upon massive layer violations to get 
> things going and c) actually know what the identity is to be 
> in all cases.  For example, I can't for the life of me 
> imagine why L2 would know or care about a specific hostname 
> (which after all is an L6 identifier).  

Well, stranger things have been exchanged at L2 for various reasons,
but, that's not important. 

> In any case, this is 
> the Internet Engineering Task Force, not the Every Lame 
> Transport on the Planet Engineering Task Force; we should do 
> our own engineering in a way that our protocols are (as much 
> as possible) independent of other folks'.  

And we are.  The exchange of this data via ERP bootstrapping is totally
independent of the lower layer. 

> This appears to me 
> to be one of the cases where any reliance on a lower layer 
> not under our control is not just unnecessary but detrimental.
> 

As I agreed, no need to debate that.  We have an independent mechanism
to convey the necessary information and can ensure protocol completeness
via that. 

Vidya

--
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/>