RE: Proposed Resolution of Issue #318: REJECT

["Dave Nelson" <d.b.nelson@comcast.net>]

Glen Zorn writes...

> My assertion is that correctly implemented code changes (maybe
> that's asking too much?) do not effect interoperability, nor 
> does requiring such cause harm.

Your assertion is that correctly implemented code changes at both the client
and server ends of a client-server protocol implementation would not affect
interoperability.  True, as far as it goes.  The point that is being
addressed in the RADIUS Design Guidelines is that *requiring* code changes
on the sever side, when a data dictionary change alone would suffice, is
harmful to interoperability, or at least forces maintainers of server
implementations to make code changes they would not otherwise have to make.
The guidelines discourage attribute design choices that would force a code
change on RADIUS servers when no such change would be required with a more
"traditional" choice of attribute design.

I suspect you don't attach much value (or even credence) to this data-driven
model on the server side, but many in the RADIUS community do.



--
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/>