Re: "Last Look" at the RADIUS Design Guidelines document

[Avi Lior <avi@bridgewatersystems.com>]

I am not expecting you to redefine anything.

You have spent copious amounts of text describing the Data Model.  Why did you do that?

Do the same for the processing model?


On 14-01-2010, at 11:22 , Alan DeKok wrote:

> Alan DeKok wrote:
>>  The text on page 12 could *perhaps* be clarified by adding:
>> 
>> 	THE TEXT ABOUT APPLICATIONS IS USEFUL IF AND ONLY IF
>> 	YOU HAVE AN APPLICATION THAT SITS ON TOP OF RADIUS.
> 
>  And maybe adding:
> 
> 	BUT WE DON'T WANT TO FALL INTO THE RATS NEST OF DEFINING
> 	EXACTLY WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS BETWEEN AN APPLICATION LAYER
> 	AND RADIUS.  AFTER ALL, THIS IS A "GUIDELINES" DOCUMENT,
> 	AND NOT A "RE-DEFINE THE ENTIRE RADIUS PROCESSING MODEL"
> 	DOCUMENT.
> 
>  I think that's addressed all of Avi's concerns.
> 
>  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/>