[radext] draft-maglione-pcp-radius-ext-04

Tassos Chatzithomaoglou <achatz@forthnetgroup.gr> Thu, 02 August 2012 22:50 UTC

Return-Path: <achatz@forthnetgroup.gr>
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 5382521E8047 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 15:50:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.491
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.491 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.108, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id agM1zfwQX4Be for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 15:50:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx-out.forthnet.gr (mx-out.forthnet.gr [193.92.150.107]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0CF421E8037 for <radext@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 15:50:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx-av-05.forthnet.gr (mx-av.forthnet.gr [193.92.150.27]) by mx-out-01.forthnet.gr (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q72Mo8mZ018264 for <radext@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 01:50:08 +0300
Received: from MX-IN-02.forthnet.gr (mx-in-02.forthnet.gr [193.92.150.185]) by mx-av-05.forthnet.gr (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q72Mo83n010389 for <radext@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 01:50:08 +0300
Received: from [130.129.20.221] (dhcp-14dd.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.20.221]) (authenticated bits=0) by MX-IN-02.forthnet.gr (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q72Mo52E024444; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 01:50:07 +0300
Authentication-Results: MX-IN-02.forthnet.gr smtp.mail=achatz@forthnetgroup.gr; auth=pass (PLAIN)
Message-ID: <501B0463.9040307@forthnetgroup.gr>
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 15:51:15 -0700
From: Tassos Chatzithomaoglou <achatz@forthnetgroup.gr>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "radext@ietf.org" <radext@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [radext] draft-maglione-pcp-radius-ext-04
X-BeenThere: radext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 22:50:12 -0000

I am thinking of a similar implementation in our network, but after 
looking at the doc i couldn't find any clear example of usage.

i.e. If you can define a PCP server locally on the NAS (DHCP server), 
why do you want to supply it through radius too?

In our case, we want to differentiate service per subscriber or group of 
subscribers (in terms of port mappings) and also have the capability to 
have subscribers of the same NAS use different PCP servers in the future 
(this also helps in testing a new PCP server by a limited number of 
subscribers).

So, do you think a paragraph could be added regarding actual use cases 
of this attribute?

-- 
Tassos