RE: Request for NAS-Port-Type Allocation

["David B. Nelson" <d.b.nelson@comcast.net>]

Glen Zorn writes...

> In fact, it may fall apart at 35, since a NAS-Port-Type was
> assigned for PHS (AKA PIAFS) in RFC 2865...

And your point is that Next Generation PHS is not sufficiently
differentiated from PHS?  I think I might agree, on the general principle
that "next generation" is always relative, and what do you call the sequel?

So you've made a concrete and useful contribution to expert review.
Congratulations!

We should probably request that IANA list this entry as "PHS-MOU" and not
"Next Generation PHS".

As long as the nomenclature is unambiguous and there is some reference to a
specification, standards forum, corporation or individual that can be
contacted by anyone who really wants to know "What is this port type,
exactly?", I think it's fine.



--
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/>