Re: Comments for 2486bis WGLC
Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Tue, 17 August 2004 11:43 UTC
Envelope-to: radiusext-data@psg.com
Delivery-date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:44:52 +0000
Message-ID: <4121EF7A.6050903@piuha.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:43:54 +0300
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
Reply-To: jari.arkko@piuha.net
Organization: None
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com
Cc: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: Comments for 2486bis WGLC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Pasi, Thanks for your suggestions. I agree with them. --Jari > Some minor comments about draft-arkko-roamops-rfc2486bis-02: > > - In Section 2.1, on the line > > c =/ %x2b ; '*' allowed > > the '*' in the comment should be '+' > > - In Section 2.1, the line > > c =/ %x5e-7e ; '^' - ' allowed > > would probably be easier to understand if written out: > > c =/ %x5e ; '^' allowed > c =/ %x5f ; '_' allowed > c =/ %x60-7a ; 'a'-'z' allowed > c =/ %x7b ; '{' allowed > c =/ %x7c ; '|' allowed > c =/ %x7d ; '}' allowed > c =/ %x7e ; '~' allowed > > - In Appendix A, fourth bullet: it seems there are no > stricter requirements on the part preceding the '!' > sign _unless_ it's explicitly known that this realm > supports this syntax. > > So it's not a backwards-compatibility problem: something > like "foo!bar@example.com" continues to be a valid NAI > (even though "foo" is not a valid realm) unless it's > known that example.com uses the stricter syntax > from section 2.7. -- to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>
- Re: Comments for 2486bis WGLC Jari Arkko
- Comments for 2486bis WGLC Pasi.Eronen