Re: Issue with Guidelines document

[Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>]

Bernard Aboba wrote:
>> Yes. I suggest that the Extended attributes draft (and maybe even the
>> guidelines document) contain text that says "Extended attributes with
>> Vendor-Id of zero (0) are not to be interpreted as VSA's within the
>> meaning of the other drafts".
> 
> You might be able to make that recommendation with respect to
> implementations
> that understand Extended Attributes (e.g. implementations of the Extended
> Attribute specification). But how can we say that with respect to existing
> implementations?  This implies that legacy implementations will treat
> Extended Attributes like VSAs (e.g. ignore them if they don't understand
> them).  

  I think that's what will happen.

  We can't change the behavior of legacy implementations.  We just have
to be careful about how we use the extended attributes.

  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/>