[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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

Dave Nelson wrote:
>>   The document would cease to be a RADIUS BCP.  It would become an SDO
>> BCP, and would describe practices that are SDO specific.
>>
>>   If you want such a document, go write it in an SDO.
> 
> I'm not sure that's the best possible advice, either.  The "preferred future
> state" is a more unified RADIUS data model, not a more fragment one.

  I agree that's the preferred future state.  But the "extended
attributes" document which defines IETF RADIUS complex types isn't finished.

  The guidelines document can therefore discuss nothing more than the
current state of RADIUS: basic data types, and "ad hoc" complex types
(RFC 4679, 5090, etc.)

  I have no objection to adding complex types in this WG.  But it hasn't
happened yet, and the "guidelines" document isn't the place to define them.

  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/>