[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RADEXT WG Consensus call on acceptance of RADSEC as a work item

To: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: RADEXT WG Consensus call on acceptance of RADSEC as a work item
From: Alan DeKok <aland@nitros9.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 07:01:44 +0100
In-reply-to: <003601c887c0$e3607840$0501f00a@arubanetworks.com>
References: <BLU137-DS3A238BFF835F92E7F67E8930A0@phx.gbl> <A6398B0DB62A474C82F61554EE93728704F9BAE3@proton.jnpr.net> <003601c887c0$e3607840$0501f00a@arubanetworks.com>
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080227)

Glen Zorn wrote:
> Actually, it meets the needs of _no_ group of RADIUS users, since it is
> not RADIUS. 

  You're very clear on what RADIUS is.  One of the points of feedback
was that the guidelines document needed to state the key assumptions
behind RADIUS.  It looks like you could help here.

  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/>

References:
- RADEXT WG Consensus call on acceptance of RADSEC as a work item
  - From: <Bernard_Aboba@hotmail.com>
- RE: RADEXT WG Consensus call on acceptance of RADSEC as a work item
  - From: "Stephen Hanna" <shanna@juniper.net>
- RE: RADEXT WG Consensus call on acceptance of RADSEC as a work item
  - From: "Glen Zorn" <glenzorn@comcast.net>

Prev by Date: Re: RADEXT WG Consensus call on acceptance of RADSEC as a work item
Next by Date: Re: RADEXT WG Consensus call on acceptance of RADSEC as a work item
Previous by thread: RE: RADEXT WG Consensus call on acceptance of RADSEC as a work item
Next by thread: Re: RADEXT WG Consensus call on acceptance of RADSEC as a work item
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread