IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com> Tue, 06 September 2016 15:15 UTC

Return-Path: <aland@deployingradius.com>
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 971E812B6E4; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 08:15:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-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 wtWnKRM4pbNi; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 08:15:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.networkradius.com (mail.networkradius.com [62.210.147.122]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD27612B58B; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 08:11:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.networkradius.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11458C37; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 15:11:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.networkradius.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail-server.vmhost2.networkradius.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VztpDJY8o3p6; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 15:11:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.100.59] (69-196-165-104.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.165.104]) by mail.networkradius.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 23ECF91D; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 15:11:15 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
In-Reply-To: <9128_1473174225_57CEDAD1_9128_1350_1_6B7134B31289DC4FAF731D844122B36E01F9F961@OPEXCLILM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2016 11:11:13 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4B308285-584D-4A53-BCA0-F1EC1F9C3BC9@deployingradius.com>
References: <147137412687.22998.17081075232946825763.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAHbuEH7+Gw=zDiN66Aydmie2M4dXcVqjLKWHixR7Qe6ECfN9Hg@mail.gmail.com> <D0152C61-D391-482B-BF1E-45180F89DA41@cooperw.in> <EACFFDF5-3974-4778-8EDD-A68410BAD972@gmail.com> <28413_1473165080_57CEB718_28413_354_4_6B7134B31289DC4FAF731D844122B36E01F9F38E@OPEXCLILM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <4DCE81CA-FC1F-4CFF-82E1-135E158087C6@deployingradius.com> <9128_1473174225_57CEDAD1_9128_1350_1_6B7134B31289DC4FAF731D844122B36E01F9F961@OPEXCLILM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
To: "lionel.morand@orange.com" <lionel.morand@orange.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/radext/DNM0qEjyEYRooNvQ1SY4KRSVbcg>
Cc: "draft-ietf-radext-ip-port-radius-ext@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-radext-ip-port-radius-ext@ietf.org>, "radext@ietf.org" <radext@ietf.org>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, "kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com" <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "radext-chairs@ietf.org" <radext-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [radext] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-radext-ip-port-radius-ext-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: radext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Tue, 06 Sep 2016 15:15:53 -0000

On Sep 6, 2016, at 11:03 AM, <lionel.morand@orange.com> <lionel.morand@orange.com> wrote:
> " In this case, there are multiple parent attributes which define essentially the same sub-TLVs.  It would be nice to be able to re-use these these sub-TLVs, without having multiple different definitions for them." 
> 
> How do you know that a newly defined sub-TLV will/may be reused or not in other (future) parent attributes? 

  You know that the sub-TLVs are re-used in the current spec.  Future attributes are largely a future problem.

> In the document describing the new attribute, you may have a clear idea about the use in multiple parent attributes for one sub-TLV (Foo) and you may consider that another sub-TLV (Bar) will be used only once. But tomorrow, for another purpose, the sub-TLV Bar appears to be really useful and it is decided to use it in multiple (new) attributes. 
> 
> How will you ensure that the same value can be reused for Bar if not reserved? 

  Which is why I agreed with the idea to create a registry for the sub-TLVs.

  Alan DeKok.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email