Re: Draft of extensions format

[Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>]

Peter Deacon wrote:
> Please disregard, I get it now.  This is all essentially describing
> wimax and works the same way and I can do the same thing.

  Yes.

> Every time I look at the TLV description all I see is "nesting"
> "encapsulation" and "container" as in attributes within attributes never
> attributes NEXT to attributes and it wasn't clear to me thats what was
> being described. Its my fault.

  Section 7.4 had an example of concatenated TLVs in an attribute.

>> From 2.3.1
> 
> "That is, the "container" TLV-Length field MUST be exactly two (2)
>    more than the sum of the "contained" TLV-Length fields."
> 
> If the container is not a TLV itself but instead an Extension attribute
> then there is no containing TLV-Length field actually present on the wire.

  Yes.

> The length field in this case is the extensions length field which is an
> extension header representing a TLV value.

  It defines an attribute which contains TLVs.  So we have two
containers for TLVs: the new format attributes, and TLVs themselves.

  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/>