All,I think backwards compatibility is poor excuse to preserve 6 octet Calling-Station-Id given Alcatel-Lucent and, according to ASN-GW documentation, Cisco use RFC 3580 Calling-Station-Id format with WiMAX. I have a trace that shows Huawei ASN-GW sends Calling-Station-Id as 12 hex characters lowercase, not binary. Not sure what other vendors send but at least there is some confusion among some vendors. I think a survey of additional WiMAX ASN-GW vendors would show whether there is an actual backwards compatibility issue.
BR, Mike Michael Bean (Mike) Alcatel-Lucent AAA Product Group 3461 Robin Ln, Ste 1 Cameron Park, CA 95682 Email: bean@alcatel-lucent.com Phone: 530 672 7577 Fax: 530 676 3442 David B. Nelson wrote:
Avi Lior writes...It seems to me that a binary representation would be a more appropriate treatment for this value.Perhaps, but RFC 3580 followed many years of tradition in choosing the dashed-ASCII representation.So it is best to leave the presentation to a presentation layer and not the RADIUS layer.Well, no. The syntax and semantics of RADIUS attribute are a matter of the RADIUS protocol. There is no presentation layer, and contrary to commonly held belief, RADIUS is not simply a transport protocol. :-)It isn't busted.Not within the "walled garden" of WiMAX. On a global interoperabilityscale, I claim that it is broken.And changing it now will break backwards compatibility.Yes. The question is whether to "cowboy up" and fix it now.
-- 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/>