Re: [Dime] WG adoption call for draft-zorn-dime-rfc4005bis-01

Sebastien Decugis [mailto://sdecugis@nict.go.jp] writes:

>  Hello Dan,
> 
> >> First of all, not being useful is a good enough rationale to
> >> revise a RFC?
> > Let me try to argue that yes, it is.
> It is good to know for the general case.
> 
> >  A section in a Proposed Standard
> > that is not useful may lead to (at least) two counter-productive
> > effects:
> > - efforts are being made for implementation that result in useless
> code
> > with the risk of bugs and wasting resources
> That would be the case if that section was claimed as "mandatory to
> implement". It is not the case in RFC4005. So, people will implement it
> only when they plan to actually use it.

This would be true only if all NASREQ implementations are custom jobs.  I'm
not that pessimistic about Diameter ;-).

> 
> > - the function that is described by the 'not useful' section seems to
> > apparently solve what may be a real problem, discouraging search other
> > ways of solving the problem (as 'there already is a standard way')
> I personnally believe that the solution presented in RFC4005 is as good
> as it can be, and there will be no better solution for solving this
> particular problem. 

Obviously, I disagree :-).  A possibly interesting historical note: but for
political reasons, the RADIA approach would be the one in RFC 4005.

...

> Since this section describes how to translate RADIUS to Diameter NASREQ
> application (and not the general translation case), I think it makes
> sense to have this inside this document. But I have no objection should
> the group decide to reorganize the set of documents to group all
> RADIUS/Diameter translation sections from all documents into one big
> guideline. It is a large work.

Actually (as Stefan noted) the work is very slight: "It doesn't work".

> 
> Best regards,
> Sebastien.
> 
> --
> Sebastien Decugis
> Research fellow
> Network Architecture Group
> NICT (nict.go.jp)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> DiME@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime