Re: [netext] Consensus call for adopting draft-xia-netext-radius-00 as WG document
"Glen Zorn" <gwz@net-zen.net> Fri, 23 April 2010 03:00 UTC
Return-Path: <gwz@net-zen.net>
X-Original-To: netext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 902673A685A for <netext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 20:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.98
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.98 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C+C4NTcrXbw6 for <netext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 20:00:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p3plsmtpa01-08.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa01-08.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [72.167.82.88]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A40F73A67B4 for <netext@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Apr 2010 20:00:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 24812 invoked from network); 23 Apr 2010 03:00:24 -0000
Received: from unknown (115.67.32.233) by p3plsmtpa01-08.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (72.167.82.88) with ESMTP; 23 Apr 2010 03:00:21 -0000
From: Glen Zorn <gwz@net-zen.net>
To: netext@ietf.org
References: <C7F611E0.744C%basavaraj.patil@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <C7F611E0.744C%basavaraj.patil@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 10:00:08 +0700
Organization: Network Zen
Message-ID: <000001cae291$1b8b9bf0$52a2d3d0$@net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcriVJBTgl8pLxP7zUyjkmgyPr/2xAAOZkBA
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: netext-chairs@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netext] Consensus call for adopting draft-xia-netext-radius-00 as WG document
X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " <netext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext>, <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext>
List-Post: <mailto:netext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext>, <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 03:00:36 -0000
Basavaraj Patil [mailto://Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com] writes: > Hello, > > At IETF77 we had consensus on adopting I-D: draft-xia-netext-radius-00 > as a > WG document. > > This is a followup on the ML w.r.t the consensus reached at IETF77. > > If you have any concerns or objections to adopting this I-D as a Netext > WG > document, please speak up (on the list or send a note to the chairs). I have no objections to the adoption of the draft but a quick review of the document does raise a few issues. There are a few references to Diameter that seem irrelevant and lots of grammatical errors, but the most obvious question is of the consistent duplication of attributes. For example, why are both PMIP6-Home-LMA-IPv6-Address & PMIP6-Visited-LMA-IPv6-Address defined? Are both attributes expected to occur the same RADIUS message? If so, this should be stated; if not then there is no need, AFAICT, for two attributes to be defined. The IANA Considerations section doesn't say whether the attribute numbers are to be assigned from the standard attribute namespace but I assume that they are; that space is small & rapidly being depleted, so I think that the unnecessary creation of standard RADIUS attributes should be avoided. > > -Chairs > > _______________________________________________ > netext mailing list > netext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext