|
> > Does the data fit utilize ad-hoc extensions to the RADIUS data model, > > as outlined in below? If so, it SHOULD be encapsulated in a RADIUS VSA > > or an Extended Attribute [EXTENDED]. > > While it may be feasible to group the ad-hoc extensions into a handful of > categories, I'm not sure what benefit this provides. Anything *other* than > the (limited) standard data model is automatically an ad-hoc extension, > right? Do we need to provide examples? Once the ad-hoc extensions are included in Appendix B, as is claimed in Section 1, then several questions arise: * Which, if any, of these additional data types are suitable for use in Extended Attributes? * Which, if any, of these additional data types are appropriate for use in SDO-specific attributes? * Which, if any, of these additional data types are appropriate for use in VSAs? Presumably, the answer to these questions might be different. It is possible that some of these questions may be left to other documents; for example, the Extended Attributes document could deal with the data model appropriate to those attributes (incorporating Section A.1.2 from Design Guidelines, for example). It is also possible that some of these questions may be explicitly ruled out of scope. But if so, that needs to be made clear within Section 1.1, which deals with Applicability. |