[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Revisions to RFC 4005 (was RE: Consideration of draft-lior-radius-attribute-type-extension-02.txt)

To: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Revisions to RFC 4005 (was RE: Consideration of draft-lior-radius-attribute-type-extension-02.txt)
From: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 06:53:45 +0200
Cc: glenzorn@comcast.net, d.b.nelson@comcast.net, radiusext@ops.ietf.org
In-reply-to: <BAY117-F2333BB3F55E34FD819DA6893CD0@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY117-F2333BB3F55E34FD819DA6893CD0@phx.gbl>
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.13 (X11/20070824)

Bernard Aboba wrote:
> Because the extended attribute draft uses Attribute 26, but with a
> vendor code of 0, which currently isn't supported by RFC 4005?

  Also, the suggested format for RADIUS VSA's mirrors normal RADIUS
attributes.  With an extended attribute format, SDO's will say "Me,
too", and use the same format for their attributes.  Those attributes
then have to be translated to Diameter.

  Alan DeKok.

--
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/>

References:
- RE: Revisions to RFC 4005 (was RE: Consideration of draft-lior-radius-attribute-type-extension-02.txt)
  - From: "Bernard Aboba" <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>

Prev by Date: RE: Revisions to RFC 4005 (was RE: Consideration of draft-lior-radius-attribute-type-extension-02.txt)
Next by Date: Re: Revisions to RFC 4005 (was RE: Consideration of draft-lior-radius-attribute-type-extension-02.txt)
Previous by thread: RE: Revisions to RFC 4005 (was RE: Consideration of draft-lior-radius-attribute-type-extension-02.txt)
Next by thread: RE: Revisions to RFC 4005 (was RE: Consideration of draft-lior-radius-attribute-type-extension-02.txt)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread