Re: The Zorn appeal....

[Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>]

>> 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).
> according to the procedures I think we have, the first step in IESG 
> processing is to ask the responsible AD to give his/her opinion on the 
> matter.
> 
> According to the tracker, that's Randy.
> 
> Randy - your comments?

shame glen did not raise this earlier.  bottom line, i don't know
what is right.  we were hesitant in the first place.  but multiple
vendors implement this.

perhaps we should indeed run it through an IETF last call.

randy