IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [radext] Help with diameter considerations for draft-hartman-radext-bigger-packets

Sam Hartman <hartmans@painless-security.com> Wed, 12 February 2014 21:02 UTC

Return-Path: <hartmans@painless-security.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 4E5251A06BF for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:02:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.448
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548] 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 2FMHZJVD2xWn for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:02:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.painless-security.com (mail.painless-security.com [23.30.188.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71A891A06AE for <radext@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:02:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.painless-security.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D77520675; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 15:58:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mail.painless-security.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.suchdamage.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BVKIDXSQVrw8; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 15:58:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: from carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (c-50-177-27-27.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [50.177.27.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "laptop", Issuer "laptop" (not verified)) by mail.painless-security.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 15:58:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: by carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (Postfix, from userid 8042) id D641483E0B; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 16:02:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans@painless-security.com>
To: Jouni <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
References: <tsl4n44rr3y.fsf@mit.edu> <CCE45314-4EFE-4C64-9794-85006392F834@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 16:02:14 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CCE45314-4EFE-4C64-9794-85006392F834@gmail.com> (Jouni's message of "Wed, 12 Feb 2014 22:58:40 +0200")
Message-ID: <tslvbwkqc2x.fsf@mit.edu>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: radext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [radext] Help with diameter considerations for draft-hartman-radext-bigger-packets
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: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 21:02:19 -0000

>>>>> "Jouni" == Jouni  <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> writes:

    Jouni> One serious suggestion is just dropping the Diameter
    Jouni> considerations unless you really insist doing one. We have
    Jouni> not required one for some time already and that has not been
    Jouni> an issue during the publication process.


Great suggestion!
It's there only because back when I was on the IESG they seemed to be
required and I assumed they still were.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email