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

[Alan DeKok <aland@nitros9.org>]

Glen Zorn wrote:
> Maybe.  What do you have in mind?  I don't think so, because standard
> Diameter AVPs don't have the 'V' bit set & AFAIK, no existing VSAs of any
> variety have a Vendor code of 0.

  That would be backwards compatible, and wouldn't require changes to
existing implementations.

>  We may have a problem translating the new
> RADIUS "grouped attributes" to Diameter, though, because don't Diameter
> grouped AVPs have a fixed syntax?

  Yes.  We could say that the extended attributes are encapsulated in a
Diameter attribute 26 as-is... except that attribute 26 isn't allowed in
Diameter packets.

  However it is done, it looks like we have to update 4005 to obtain
Diameter compatibility for the extended attributes.

  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/>