Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis-02
Dave Dolson <ddolson@sandvine.com> Wed, 03 May 2017 14:21 UTC
Return-Path: <ddolson@sandvine.com>
X-Original-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 376D8128990; Wed, 3 May 2017 07:21:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tGB9aoqVKFml; Wed, 3 May 2017 07:21:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1.sandvine.com (Mail1.sandvine.com [64.7.137.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99513128B8F; Wed, 3 May 2017 07:19:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BLR-EXCHP-2.sandvine.com (192.168.196.172) by wtl-exchp-1.sandvine.com (192.168.194.176) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Wed, 3 May 2017 10:19:03 -0400
Received: from WTL-EXCHP-1.sandvine.com ([fe80::ac6b:cc1e:f2ff:93aa]) by blr-exchp-2.sandvine.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Wed, 3 May 2017 10:19:02 -0400
From: Dave Dolson <ddolson@sandvine.com>
To: "Gardella, Maryse (Nokia - FR/Nozay)" <maryse.gardella@nokia.com>, Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
CC: Yuval Lifshitz <ylifshitz@sandvine.com>, jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>, "dime@ietf.org list" <dime@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis-02
Thread-Index: AQHSw4y4qV7yR/Gy6kGQdrOKlX57GKHhk7nwgABUS4CAAPRJgP//y4GQ
Date: Wed, 03 May 2017 14:19:02 +0000
Message-ID: <E8355113905631478EFF04F5AA706E98705C6E32@wtl-exchp-1.sandvine.com>
References: <FFB3377A-3F65-456E-8EFC-CBBA2B671566@gmail.com> <HE1PR0701MB2857B67205A4B3CD908191FCFC100@HE1PR0701MB2857.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <C43C255C7106314F8D13D03FA20CFE497007F6E1@wtl-exchp-1.sandvine.com> <E8355113905631478EFF04F5AA706E98705BA165@wtl-exchp-1.sandvine.com> <C43C255C7106314F8D13D03FA20CFE497007FABD@wtl-exchp-1.sandvine.com> <20170428113946.5161041.83399.10532@sandvine.com> <E8355113905631478EFF04F5AA706E98705C5971@wtl-exchp-1.sandvine.com> <670A9410-00F7-4883-B714-E0CA5E9A1234@deployingradius.com> <E8355113905631478EFF04F5AA706E98705C5B5A@wtl-exchp-1.sandvine.com> <3ABC7A8B-00DD-4032-85F0-D712A5517622@deployingradius.com> <HE1PR0701MB285719DD14A7786035A41917FC160@HE1PR0701MB2857.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR0701MB285719DD14A7786035A41917FC160@HE1PR0701MB2857.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.200.114]
x-c2processedorg: b2f06e69-072f-40ee-90c5-80a34e700794
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dime/McCwHgiduIxhMhlAulsYLbyFApY>
Subject: Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis-02
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diameter Maintanence and Extentions Working Group <dime.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dime/>
List-Post: <mailto:dime@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 May 2017 14:21:43 -0000
RFC4282 is also obsolete, and RFC7542 explains the problems with it. I don't think we should introduce RFC4282 at this point. (And sorry, I don't see RFC 6377 referring to 4282) -----Original Message----- From: Gardella, Maryse (Nokia - FR/Nozay) [mailto:maryse.gardella@nokia.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2017 9:21 AM To: Alan DeKok; Dave Dolson Cc: Yuval Lifshitz; jouni korhonen; dime@ietf.org list; draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis-02 Hello all, For the new AVP, no question: RFC 7542 should be used. I have not the full overview of 3GPP specs used for reference to NAI, and based on: - assuming the TS 23.003 (Numbering, addressing and identification) is an important spec to consider, the RFC 4282 is used - RFC 6377 DBP also referring to RFC 4282 I would tend to agree on at least using RFC 4282 as the reference for the END_USER_NAI in Subscription-Id-Type for RFC4006bis. Whether to directly refer to RFC7542, I cannot confirm whether this is acceptable or not. BR Maryse -----Original Message----- From: Alan DeKok [mailto:aland@deployingradius.com] Sent: mercredi 3 mai 2017 00:47 To: Dave Dolson <ddolson@sandvine.com> Cc: Yuval Lifshitz <ylifshitz@sandvine.com>; Gardella, Maryse (Nokia - FR/Nozay) <maryse.gardella@nokia.com>; jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>; dime@ietf.org list <dime@ietf.org>; draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis-02 On May 2, 2017, at 5:51 PM, Dave Dolson <ddolson@sandvine.com> wrote: > > Thanks Alan. > Do I correctly hear you saying we should replace all references to RFC 2486 with RFC 7542? Yes. It's 2017. Independent of RFC 7542, *inter-operable* implementations just have no business using non-UTF8 identifiers. Alan DeKok.
- [Dime] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis-02 jouni korhonen
- Re: [Dime] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis… Bertz, Lyle T [CTO]
- Re: [Dime] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis… Yuval Lifshitz
- Re: [Dime] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis… Dave Dolson
- Re: [Dime] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis… Gardella, Maryse (Nokia - FR/Nozay)
- Re: [Dime] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis… Gardella, Maryse (Nokia - FR/Nozay)
- Re: [Dime] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis… Yuval Lifshitz
- Re: [Dime] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis… lionel.morand
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Gardella, Maryse (Nokia - FR/Nozay)
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Yuval Lifshitz
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Dave Dolson
- Re: [Dime] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4006bis… jouni korhonen
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Yuval Lifshitz
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Dave Dolson
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Dave Dolson
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Alan DeKok
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Dave Dolson
- [Dime] RE : Re: [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime… lionel.morand
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Alan DeKok
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Gardella, Maryse (Nokia - FR/Nozay)
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Dave Dolson
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Gardella, Maryse (Nokia - FR/Nozay)
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Yuval Lifshitz
- Re: [Dime] [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime-rfc4… Dave Dolson
- [Dime] RE : Re: [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-dime… lionel.morand
- Re: [Dime] RE : Re: [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-… Dave Dolson
- Re: [Dime] RE : Re: [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-… Gardella, Maryse (Nokia - FR/Nozay)
- Re: [Dime] RE : Re: [ALU] WGLC #1 for draft-ietf-… Dave Dolson