-----
Original Message ----
From: Glen Zorn <glenzorn@comcast.net>
To: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
Cc: radext mailing list <radiusext@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, September 1, 2008 5:33:30 AM
Subject: RE: no overall type in Extended Attributes
Alan DeKok [mailto:aland@deployingradius.com]
writes:
> Glen Zorn wrote:
> > Right. The example is related to security...anyway, here's an
idea:
> how
> > about breaking the Ext-Type field into 2 8-bit fields one of which
> stays in
> > the Extended Attribute header (giving naming capability for the
> attribute
> > itself) & the other staying in the TLV header?
>
> Are we back to 8-bit types for the Extended-Attribute?
I don't know, it's just a suggestion; it does have the virtue of retaining
the existing layout (at least for the first AVP) & reducing the size of
AVPs. I do think that something needs to be done, though, & this is
the
least disruptive solution I've come up with so far.
>
> 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/>