Re: On issue 6: Avi review of I-D Action:draft-ietf-radext-design-13.txt

[Avi Lior <avi@bridgewatersystems.com>]

On 03-06-2010, at 05:02 , Alan DeKok wrote:

>> 
>> Issue 6:
>> Section 3.2
>> 
>> " These approaches are often incompatible, leading to
>>   additional complexity in RADIUS implementations."
>> 
>> But they dont have to be compatible.
> 
>  The above text is in a section titled "Rationale", i.e. motivation for
> the document.  Motivation includes explanations of why bad things are bad.
> 
>> Get rid of that statement.
> 
>  If everyone had done "the right thing" for RADIUS design, there would
> have been no need for the guidelines document.  Unfortunately, that is
> not the case, and the rationale for the document should be explained.

The above states that the approach taken by SDOs when working on their attributes was incompatible - but as the document asserts SDOs dont have to be compatible with other SDOs.

Just say:

These approaches lead to additional complexity in RADIUS implementations.

Avi Lior
avi@bridgewatersystems.com
office: +1 613-591-9104x6417
    cell: +1 613-796-4183



--
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/>