RE: IPv6 Address Option

["Glen Zorn" <glenzorn@comcast.net>]

Alan DeKok [mailto:aland@deployingradius.com] writes:

> Glen Zorn wrote:
> > ... but draft-ietf-radext-design-08, section 2.1.2 says (talking
> about
> > the tagging mechanism defined in RFC 2868) "New attributes SHOULD NOT
> use
> > this tagging method...".  Which is it?
> 
>   I suggest racing against the design guidelines document.  

What a great idea!  Since the Mis-Guidelines draft is in IESG evaluation &
our draft has yet to be accepted as a WG item, it's a race we're sure to
win!  A more likely scenario: we change our draft to match your "review",
then the Mis-Guidelines draft is published as an ACP (Alan's Current
Practice) & presto, we get to change it again.  It would be a classic of
obstructionism, if only it weren't so obvious.

> After all, it's only a draft.  

Hmm.  That didn't seem to be relevant when you used it a club (its real
purpose) to beat up draft-zorn-radius-pkmv1-06 last month.  

...



--
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/>