Re: RADEXT WG last call on RADIUS Design Guidelines Document

[Alan DeKok <aland@nitros9.org>]

Greg Weber wrote:
> I went through the current RADIUS Guidelines doc and do not have any
> technical comments -one question and a couple minor editorial comments
> below.  I think the doc can be passed to IESG.

  Great!
> Question:  In the description of polymorphic attributes (sec 3.2), what 
> does this mean:  "...the meaning of an attribute may depend on earlier
> packets in a sequence."  ?   Is that referring to a request/challenge
> sequence?

  Yes.  Or, a series of otherwise unrelated Accounting-Requests.

  It's targeted at un-named SDO's and/or vendors who have horrid
practices for dealing with attributes.  Not just polymorphic attributes
in one packet (if A then it's type B, otherwise it's type C), but across
packets for *unrelated* sessions.

> Minor Editorial changes:
> Sec 1.1: "it's usage" -> "its usage"
> Sec 2.1.3: "to introduced" -> "to be introduced"
> Sec 2.1.3: "This issues" -> "These issues"
> Sec 2.1.3: "attributes involve authentication" -> "attributes involving
> authentication"
> Sec 2.1.3: I'd remove the "(e.g., IPv6 address)" from the last
> paragraph.  That's not
>   a good example anymore as we've earlier called IPv6 a basic data type
> in Sec 2.1.1.
> Sec 2.2: Last paragraph has the wrong indentation
> Sec 3.1.1: "vendors and SDOs they SHOULD" -> "vendors and SDOs SHOULD"
> Sec 3.1.3: Expand PEC acronym at first use?

  Already done in Section 2.2.

> Sec A.1.2: "not included nested groups" -> "not include nested groups"

  All other changes are good, thanks.

  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/>