RE: 64-bit Unsigned Integer?

Glen Zorn said:

“I’m wondering when it was decided (& who made the decision) that if an implementation doesn’t follow the standard, it’s the standard that’s broken & not the implementation…”

There are several issues that have been brought up:

1. What does RFC 3162 say about the type of the Interface-ID attribute? The current Design Guidelines document asserts it is an 64-bit unsigned integer. As you pointed out, this does not appear to be supported by the text of RFC 3162.

2. Should the Design Guidelines document recommend that implementations support the 64-bit unsigned integer type?

a. Because it is currently supported?

b. For some other reason?

The question you have raised doesn’t seem relevant to either of the two above questions.

From: Glen Zorn [mailto:glenzorn@comcast.net]
Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 8:43 AM
To: 'Bernard Aboba'
Cc: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
Subject: RE: 64-bit Unsigned Integer?

Glen has brought up the question of whether existing RADIUS server
implementations in fact support 64-bit unsigned integers, or whether
they implement attributes such as Interface-ID as 64-bit octet Strings,
or specially formatted types.

If you are aware of how existing implementations behave, please
reply to this message.

I’m wondering when it was decided (& who made the decision) that if an implementation doesn’t follow the standard, it’s the standard that’s broken & not the implementation…