Re: Issue: RADSEC and DTLS docs

[Stefan Winter <stefan.winter@restena.lu>]

Hi,

>   I'll rev the DTLS document soon.  We can then see how much of it
> simply references radsec.  If the DTLS-specific portions are small, it
> may be good to add them to the radsec document.
>   

Judging from your rev from June, it looks like there are too many
changes to easily merge the two documents. I tried to do it by
mentioning at all the neuralgic points

If (... radsec...) then the following applies; if (...RDTLS...) then the
other thing applies...

but had to do it so often that the text looked really ugly, unreadable,
and might be prone for misinterpretation and decided to quit without saving.

I suggest to keep the DTLS document separate, but have it reference the
relevant portions of the radsec draft (just as section 2 of
draft-dekok-radext-dtls-01 does).

Greetings,

Stefan Winter

-- 
Stefan WINTER
Ingenieur de Recherche
Fondation RESTENA - Réseau Téléinformatique de l'Education Nationale et de la Recherche
6, rue Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi
L-1359 Luxembourg

Tel: +352 424409 1
Fax: +352 422473


--
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/>