Re: [radext] Control of RFC 3580. Transfer to RADIUS WG possible?

If the IETF does not have change control, which is the case with some
documents, we can't just pick it up and change/update the document.
Let's figure out if something is needed and then we'll figure out what
we can do or what needs to be done in the IEEE.

Thanks,
Kathleen

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 9:17 AM, Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com> wrote:
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 9:05 AM, Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> So far, the issues discussed relate to accounting, which is a relatively minor aspect of RFC 3580.
>
>   Which is good.
>
>> Furthermore, the accounting issues relate largely to IEEE 802.11, rather than to IEEE 802.1X, which was the focus of RFC 3580.
>
>   Which is also goo.
>
>> As a result, it is not at all clear to me why it is necessary to transfer control of this document from IEEE 802 to the IETF,
>
>   That's not the purpose of the discussion.
>
>> let alone why it is necessary to revise it at all.
>
>   The revisions were motivated from seeing inter-operability problems, and implementation problems.  The existing RFCs discuss user sessions, but the concept is vague and ill defined.  The guidelines for how a NAS / server should handle user sessions are similarly vague.
>
>   This vagueness causes real-world problems.  I run into this pretty much every week.
>
>> If there is a desire to deal with accounting issues relating to IEEE 802.11, why not create a new document focused on that topic, with review by IEEE 802.11?  If necessary, it can update RFC 3580.
>
>   That is the best approach, I think.
>
>   Alan DeKok.
>
> _______________________________________________
> radext mailing list
> radext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext

-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen