RE: RADIUS IANA -03

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

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

> I'm happy with this version; I think it explains the 
> situation wrt the 
> packet type codes well.

The "situation" as I understand it is that people have appropriated type
codes, ignoring IETF process.  This situation continues w/the Chivba
draft & all this draft does is try to justify these violations, both
after and before the fact.  The right thing to do in this document (if
we're really interested in interoperability, rather than some type of
organizational exercise in CYA) is to reserve the proprietary,
unassigned type codes (including those used by the Chiba draft) pending
a standards-track document fully describing their usage.

> 
>                Harald
> 
> --On mandag, mars 31, 2003 12:30:06 -0800 Bernard Aboba 
> <aboba@internaut.com> wrote:
> 
> > I've posted an -03 version of RADIUS IANA considerations to 
> the IETF 
> > archive at the following location:
> >
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-aboba-radius-iana-03.txt
> >
> > Please have a look at this version to see if it addresses your 
> > concerns. As Glen has noted, it is probably best not to bless 
> > undocumented usage of RADIUS Type Codes. On the other hand, it 
> > probably also makes sense not to reuse them, at least until 
> the other 
> > available Type Codes are exhausted.
> >
> > Comments welcome. Please send specific text of suggested edits, if 
> > possible.
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
>