RE: IPv6

["Wojciech Dec (wdec)" <wdec@cisco.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan DeKok [mailto:aland@deployingradius.com] 
> Sent: 06 October 2009 23:34
> To: Wojciech Dec (wdec)
> Cc: Bernard Aboba; David B. Nelson; radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: IPv6
> 
> Wojciech Dec (wdec) wrote:
> > That same RFC 2865, in section 5, states:
> > 
> >       string    1-253 octets containing binary data (values 
> 0 through
> >                 255 decimal, inclusive).  Strings of length zero (0)
> >                 MUST NOT be sent; omit the entire attribute instead.
> > 
> > With that, Ipv6 Prefix, Route options, 
> Auth-IPv6-Prefix-User-ID, etc 
> > would be pretty much covered by using the string term.
> 
>   The document says that attributes are of type "string", and 
> not IPv6 prefix or integer.  Re-defining "32-bit integer" to 
> mean "string" is an argument from absurdity.

Guess someone forgot to add a character encoding set limitation to the
definition of "string" above. Without it, any sequence of 1-253 octets
falls neatly under the "a string". That said, rfc 3162 clearly already
has a "call it whatever you want" data-type for "Framed-IPv6-Prefix",
which happens to be the same type of data as in the IPv6-Prefix in
draft-lourdelet.
Re Auth-IPv6-Prefix-User-ID, changing it to a string would definitely
work (and I see no problem in that).

The odd one out is probably the IPv6-Route-Option-Preference in
draft-lourdelet, which has an rfc4191 derived 2 bit signed integer. No
problem in changing that to a simple signed integer, while restricting
the values.
 

> 
> >> 3.3 IPv6-Prefix
> >>   Defines an 8-bit tag followed by a 64-bit integer.  There are NO 
> >> existing attributes that are tagged 64-bit integers.
> >> This data type is new.
> > 
> > Are unsigned 64-bit integers really a new thing to Radius? 
> 
>   You missed the word "tagged" in the sentence above.  That 
> makes my comment meaningful, instead of nonsensical.

I'm still finding the issue rather nonsensical. Do you really mean to
say that the addition of an attribute, the tag, requires the
re-definition of each and every data type that radius has, eg "the
tagged 64-bit unsigned integer", etc? That's bizzarre at best... Why?

-Woj.


> 
> > That would
> > seemingly contradict what's presented as de facto in
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-radext-design-08#section-2.1.1
> 
>   Only if you take a discussion about "tagged" attributes, 
> and ignore key words like "tagged".
> 
>   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/>