Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext-radius-fragmentation
Stefan Winter <stefan.winter@restena.lu> Tue, 25 March 2014 09:09 UTC
Return-Path: <stefan.winter@restena.lu>
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 147D61A0386 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 02:09:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, WEIRD_PORT=0.001] 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 oe4I-DClZUW3 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 02:09:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtprelay.restena.lu (smtprelay.restena.lu [IPv6:2001:a18:1::62]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 769C61A0369 for <radext@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 02:09:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtprelay.restena.lu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtprelay.restena.lu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B926D10583 for <radext@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 10:09:06 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:a18:1:8:921b:eff:fe1b:d2e7] (unknown [IPv6:2001:a18:1:8:921b:eff:fe1b:d2e7]) by smtprelay.restena.lu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6D971057E for <radext@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 10:09:06 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <53314783.6070802@restena.lu>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 10:08:19 +0100
From: Stefan Winter <stefan.winter@restena.lu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: radext@ietf.org
References: <53285DE2.9040802@cisco.com> <035801cf42d2$99464b80$cbd2e280$@augustcellars.com> <5328C172.5080305@deployingradius.com> <53303FB2.8090002@restena.lu> <53313E73.4030502@um.es>
In-Reply-To: <53313E73.4030502@um.es>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
OpenPGP: id=8A39DC66; url=http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC0DE6A358A39DC66
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="xrUW87ec0WFb2CeMkOA2etWpb009qOxCc"
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/radext/PjRidLEM-r_RYNkHDIL4pcFCarY
Subject: Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext-radius-fragmentation
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: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 09:09:11 -0000
Hi, > I think it is a good idea to have such a section, specially is you think > it will be requested by ops-dir reviewers if not present. I would place > it as section 10, right before "Security considerations" section, > instead of in the Introduction section, to avoid basing the explanations > on something that has not been described yet. Great, please go ahead. > I also think that the "formal violation..." discussion should be moved > here. We could also include the "proxying based on User-Name" > restriction too. Sounds like a reasonable move to me. Note that none of this removes the need for the working group to settle on the questions: - should we try to achieve an "Updates" relationship to RFC6929? - should there be an IANA registry for the flags of extended attributes? Greetings, Stefan Winter > > Regards, > Alejandro >> >> Greetings, >> >> Stefan Winter >> >>>> I believe that this update relationship needs to be retained. >>> It may be useful, but IETF process may forbid it. >>> >>> Alan DeKok. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> radext mailing list >>> radext@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> radext mailing list >> radext@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext > > > > _______________________________________________ > radext mailing list > radext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext > -- Stefan WINTER Ingenieur de Recherche Fondation RESTENA - Réseau Téléinformatique de l'Education Nationale et de la Recherche 6, rue Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi L-1359 Luxembourg Tel: +352 424409 1 Fax: +352 422473 PGP key updated to 4096 Bit RSA - I will encrypt all mails if the recipient's key is known to me http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC0DE6A358A39DC66
- [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext-rad… Benoit Claise
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Alan DeKok
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Benoit Claise
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… lionel.morand
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Jim Schaad
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Alan DeKok
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Alejandro Perez Mendez
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Michael Richardson
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Alan DeKok
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Sam Hartman
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Michael Richardson
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Alan DeKok
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Stefan Winter
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Alejandro Perez Mendez
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Stefan Winter
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Alan DeKok
- Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext… Jim Schaad