[radext] Roman Danyliw's Block on charter-ietf-radext-07-03: (with BLOCK)

[Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-radext-07-03: Block

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)



The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-radext/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
BLOCK:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

(revised ballot)
Thanks for the edits on the text in -07-01, -07-02 and -07-03.

Per "Define and publish minor extensions to RADIUS, such as new attribute
definitions.  If the RADIUS attributes are defined outside the RADEXT working
group, RADEXT will be responsible for reviewing those.", can the following be
clarified:

-- How is this "responsibility to conduct reviews" manifested?  It isn't clear
what scope this is adding to the WG?

-- Assuming this is referencing work in the IETF in other WGs, how does it
alter the standards process?  Do these reviews have any standing beyond
feedback from any other participant?  Would anyone in the IETF have to wait for
RADIUS input?  Is this a "RADIUS-directorate"-like function?

-- Does "outside of the RADEXT WG" mean outside of the IETF?  Assuming yes, is
RADEXT waiting on liaisons statements?  How does the WG know to take action if
not such statements?  If the attribute definition is happening outside of the
IETF why is there any work to do at all?  Wouldn't code points be handled by
the DEs?