IETF Logo Mail Archive

[radext] Extended Identifiers: is manual configuration in scope?

Stefan Winter <stefan.winter@restena.lu> Thu, 14 December 2017 14:43 UTC

Return-Path: <stefan.winter@restena.lu>
X-Original-To: radext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: radext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B98A5126C89 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 06:43:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, WEIRD_PORT=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 ciF1aDC9X-mq for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 06:43:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtprelay.restena.lu (smtprelay.restena.lu [IPv6:2001:a18:1::62]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB0E2126B6E for <radext@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 06:43:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aragorn.restena.lu (aragorn.restena.lu [IPv6:2001:a18:1:8::155]) by smtprelay.restena.lu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8971443A65 for <radext@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 15:43:45 +0100 (CET)
To: "radext@ietf.org" <radext@ietf.org>
From: Stefan Winter <stefan.winter@restena.lu>
Openpgp: id=AD3091F3AB24E05F4F722C03C0DE6A358A39DC66; url=http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC0DE6A358A39DC66
Message-ID: <bf0f5d3d-333c-b871-afbf-1a59be5d5bb1@restena.lu>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 15:43:45 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="cMKfM6JMPeD8MvKJhCuCh2XxQROmfNSEs"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/radext/3FiNFk80x2WF2ittxMGP5QFxVis>
Subject: [radext] Extended Identifiers: is manual configuration in scope?
X-BeenThere: radext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: RADIUS EXTensions working group discussion list <radext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/radext>, <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/radext/>
List-Post: <mailto:radext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext>, <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 14:43:49 -0000

Hello,


there is one question to which the answer did not become entirely clear
in the discussion so far.


Could the authors of the respective drafts please clearly indicate the
answer to this question:


Is a manually configured mode of operation considered in scope?


I.e. do you consider it a valid use case that an implementation presents
administrators with a configuration option "Enable Extended
Identifiers", and that the implementation starts making use of that
feature /without/ a capability negotiation using Status-Server with its
next-hop peer?


Greetings,


Stefan Winter


-- 
Stefan WINTER
Ingenieur de Recherche
Fondation RESTENA - Réseau Téléinformatique de l'Education Nationale et de la Recherche
2, avenue de l'Université
L-4365 Esch-sur-Alzette

Tel: +352 424409 1
Fax: +352 422473

PGP key updated to 4096 Bit RSA - I will encrypt all mails if the recipient's key is known to me

http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC0DE6A358A39DC66

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email