RE: Vendor-Id for radext extended attributes

["David B. Nelson" <dnelson@elbrysnetworks.com>]

Glen Zorn writes...

> > I could see having a PEN for RADIUS Extended Attributes on a per
> > organization (i.e. per SDO) basis.  It seems to me that having a 
> > PEN per working group is overly granular.
> [gwz]
> Perhaps, but it opens the possibility of treating "blocks" of 
> attributes in much the same way as Class C IP addresses: once the
> PEN is assigned, the types "beneath" it could be self-managed ...

Self-managed by whom?  By WG consensus?  What happens after the WG closes?
Would it then be by Designated Expert?  Or would it revert back to IANA?  In
the absence of a long-lived organization (longer than WGs), I don't see how
the delegated assignment authority would work. 

Additionally, I would hope that individual WGs aren't going to each need
blocks of 255 attributes.  That's a pretty scary thought...  :-)



--
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/>