Re: 答复: Q on Ver.-05 of draft-ietf-radext-ipv6-access after IETF81 radext session

[Wojciech Dec <wdec@cisco.com>]

On 17/08/2011 09:10, "Leaf yeh" <leaf.y.yeh@huawei.com> wrote:

>  My issue is when we
> try to mix in a fixed set of address assignment methods with the pool
> names.  Separation of concerns.

This is interesting, given that the root of this thread is your email
proposal for just that:
https://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext/2010/msg00959.html

Quote from the above:
" I think Framed-IPv6-Pool can be re-used for the design purpose of
Delegated-IPv6-Prefix-Pool to indicate a pool of IPv6 prefix pool. I could
even think Framed-Pool can replace Framed-IPv6-Pool to indicate the name of
a IPv6 prefix/address pool per the same logic"

draft-ietf-radext-ipv6-access-05 has no such issues does not mix pool naming
with addressing method. It defines separate string attributes for each
addressing method, and allows arbitrary pool name(s) for each.

Thanks,
Woj.


--
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/>