Re: RFC 2866 clarifications

[Alan DeKok <aland@nitros9.org>]

David Bird wrote:
> To make matters worse, some vendors allow the meaning to be reversed.

  Having it configurable is preferred to having it wrong.

> The only smooth way I see is if there was another attribute, say
> Acct-View-Point, which specified the perspective (or direction) being
> taken. This way, vendors can update their firmware becoming "compliant"
> while not requiring all the back-end systems and roaming partners they
> work with to change over night.

  Without having strong opinions... that way lies madness.  There are
many, many, potential points to fail interoperability.  Putting
inter-operability claims in a protocol is *itself* subject to
inter-operability.

  It's easier to clarify the term, and to push vendors to correctly
implement it in future products.

  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/>