Re: Issue: Data Type Advice

[Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>]

Bernard Aboba wrote:
>> Much of this is already in the document. What can we do to clarify
>> the text to avoid repeated questions?
> 
> I'd suggest that a revision of Section 1.1 is needed to clarify this. 
> Right now,
> this section seems to suggest that SDO specifications utilizing existing
> RADIUS standard data types can avail themselves of IETF review.  Also,
> as David notes, the document can be read as suggesting IETF review
> of all SDO RADIUS attribute documents. 

  I've updated the document, and put suggested text on
http://ietf.freeradius.org.

>> The most I would do is to provide horrific examples of what *not* to
>> do. i.e. putting arbitrary text strings into the "data" portion of a
>> VSA (no... no VSA-type/VSA-length/VSA-data... just Vendor-Id/text..)
> 
> Describing why this is a bad idea would probably be useful.

  I will add that to my "to do" list, and then update the web site with
suggested text.

  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/>