RE: Formal Appeal against IESG decision

["Glen Zorn" <gwz@cisco.com>]

Harald Tveit Alvestrand [mailto:harald@alvestrand.no] writes:

> Glen,
>
> just to make things clear:
> are you objecting to the inclusion of the following definitions in
> draft-chiba without putting draft-chiba on standards track?

Yes.

>
>    Codes used [2]:
>          40 - Disconnect-Request
>          41 - Disconnect-ACK
>          42 - Disconnect-NAK
>
>    Codes used [2]:
>          43 - CoF-Request
>          44 - CoF-ACK
>          45 - CoF-NAK
>
> Reference [2] is to RFC 2882 (Informational), which lists the same codes:
>
>          40 Disconnect Request
>          41 Disconnect Ack
>          42 Disconnect Nak
>          43 Change Filters Request
>          44 Change Filters Ack
>          45 Change Filters Nak
>
> These codes, too, have not been listed with IANA.
>
> Your suggestion for a suitable remedy would be appreciated.

If appropriate clean-up was done (for example, some discussion of the
retransmission behavior of the protocol and clarification of the terms
"client" and "server" in the context of the document), I wouldn't be opposed
to publishing the draft as a Proposed Standard.

>
>                   Harald
>
> --On onsdag, januar 15, 2003 01:22:28 -0800 Glen Zorn
> <gwz@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> > This is to request that the IESG review and reverse its decision to
> > approve the document draft-chiba-radius-dynamic-authorization-05.txt for
> > publication as an Informational RFC.  This draft allocates new RADIUS
> > packet type codes (40-45).  RFC 2865 states in section 6.2,
> however, that
> > "Because a new Packet Type has considerable impact on
> interoperability, a
> > new Packet Type Code requires Standards Action...".  I suppose
> that a case
> > could be made for "grandfathering in" these type codes if they had been
> > registered w/IANA under either RFC 2058 or RFC 2138 (both of
> which lacked
> > an IANA Considerations section), but the type codes in question have
> > apparently never been registered with IANA at all (see
> > http://www.iana.org/assignments/radius-types).
> >
> > Thank you for your attention to this matter.
> >
> > ~gwz
> >
> > "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
> > safety deserve neither..."
> >
> > -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
>
>
>
>