Re: [radext] Rechartering RADEXT

"Jim Schaad" <ietf@augustcellars.com> Tue, 18 March 2014 17:49 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@augustcellars.com>
X-Original-To: radext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: radext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8FA51A0739 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:49:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
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 EiSOJ1hE6RSe for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp2.pacifier.net (smtp2.pacifier.net [64.255.237.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 394581A072C for <radext@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Philemon (68-116-62-210.static.mdfd.or.charter.com [68.116.62.210]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp2.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D31222CA39; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:48:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Jim Schaad" <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: "'Benoit Claise'" <bclaise@cisco.com>, <radext@ietf.org>
References: <52C486C6-B1FD-4310-A38E-2EBEA8CDFB6F@gmail.com> <53282135.5060309@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <53282135.5060309@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:47:08 -0700
Message-ID: <034201cf42d2$15b4a780$411df680$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQN+PYqNuqUBQq5M5bTZNH7nJqZl9gEOsHvGl4CzMlA=
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/radext/40nTLRC7INszogKulUkWaqntg2w
Subject: Re: [radext] Rechartering RADEXT
X-BeenThere: radext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 17:49:07 -0000

How would you expect the WG to change a document that has the purpose of
documenting one version of a RADIUS deployment.  While I think that asking
the group to review the document for readability makes sense, having the
document as a WG item does not.

Jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: radext [mailto:radext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benoit Claise
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:34 AM
> To: Jouni Korhonen; radext@ietf.org
> Cc: radext-chairs@tools.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [radext] Rechartering RADEXT
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> I've been asked in the past to AD sponsor
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wierenga-ietf-eduroam/
> I always prefer to get proper WG review when possible...
> Therefore I'm more inclined to have this document part of the new RADEXT
> charter.
> 
> Do you see any problems with this approach?
> 
> Regards, Benoit
> > Folks,
> >
> > We are about to recharter soon, since the current charter work items are
> nearly done.
> > We got the CoA Proxying as a potential charter item. So, the question
> > is whether the WG is OK taking in the work in and at the same time
> > adding required words  into the current charter.
> >
> > During the London WG meeting we had a presentation of
> > draft-cheng-behave-cgn-cfg-radius-ext
> > I-D. Surprisingly many people had read it and there was also interest
> > around the ongoing work. So, the question is whether the WG is OK
> > taking in the work in and at the same time adding required words  into
> > the current charter. In general I would (personally) like to add text
into the
> charter allowing RADEXT take in similar work to this more easily.
> >
> > Any other topics the WG feels need to be added into the charter? I'd
> > assume at least Alan has one or two in his sleeves ;)
> >
> > - Jouni & Stefan.
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> radext mailing list
> radext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext