RE: Guidelines suggested text for checklist:

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

Bernard Aboba writes...

> How about "Rather than self-allocating new values for attribute of
> enumerated type (as described by the Vendor Specific Enumerations
> proposal in [RFC2882] Section 2.2.1), vendors SHOULD obtain an 
> allocation under the IANA guidelines of [RFC3575] Section 2.1. 
> If this is not possible, vendors should allocate an attribute from
> their Vendor-Specific space, and define an appropriate value for
> it."

I agree that this text is better.

I don't think that the VSE, as reported in RFC 2882, is so much a proposal
as it a description of [dubious] behavior observed in the field.  Let's not
go down the path of assuming that RFC 2882 describes desirable behaviors,
for future use, as much as it describes "stupid RADIUS tricks" seen in the
field.

I would go so far as to say "VSE Considered Harmful".



--
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/>