Re: [radext] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-radext-ip-port-radius-ext-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Kathleen Moriarty <[e-mail]>]

Hello,

I read through the threads again.  There was not much on list discussion of
this point, so I had to rely on what I had for information and I also
received some private messages.  With this, I am leaning towards Alan's
suggestion.  Unless WG members disagree (you are really the ones to make
this decision, I was just asked to be a tie breaker), let's go ahead with
that change in the draft after a 2 day waiting period before the updated
draft is posted.  I am not expecting any or much more discussion on this
based on emails to date.

Thank you,
Kathleen

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Kathleen Moriarty <
[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Alan DeKok <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 14, 2016, at 1:54 PM, Kathleen Moriarty <
>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>> > It seems the WG is just down to a preference question as I don't see
>> how there would be conflicts except if different parties defined their own
>> sub-TLVs and they didn't match.  Could that occur?  I have to dig deeper to
>> make sure I'm not missing anything.
>>
>>   If all TLV allocations go through IANA, then the registration procedure
>> should prevent conflict.
>>
>>   If the IANA registration procedure is well documented, then that
>> procedure should prevent conflict.
>>
>>   I don't see a big difference between allowing TLVs to be of data type
>> "integer", "ipv4 address", "sub-TLVs are OK", or "contents to be defined by
>> sub-TLV registry FOO".
>>
>>   There is simply no way to have any kind of conflict in the allocation.
>>
>> > For the future, you can ask IANA these sorts of questions via email or
>> at meetings to work through preferences if you are looking for their
>> opinion.  I should have caught that this was an issue and am not sure why I
>> didn't before putting it on a telechat.  So, that was my fault.
>>
>>   I'm not sure IANA would have an opinion here.
>>
>
> OK, so in that case I may be the tie breaker as AD,  I'll just read
> through everything again and respond, unless the WG participants start to
> show a strong preference.
>
>
>>
>>   Alan DeKok.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
> Kathleen
>



-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen