Re: [radext] Update RFC 6929 in draft-ietf-radext-radius-fragmentation

Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com> Thu, 20 March 2014 18:16 UTC

Return-Path: <aland@deployingradius.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 9321B1A06E1 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 11:16:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 eTXPyb0kHWIa for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 11:16:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from power.freeradius.org (power.freeradius.org [88.190.25.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC8771A0429 for <radext@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 11:16:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by power.freeradius.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C1432240749; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:15:30 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at power.freeradius.org
Received: from power.freeradius.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (power.freeradius.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z+wfj2UEvl-y; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:15:30 +0100 (CET)
Received: from Thor.local (bas1-ottawa11-1176224686.dsl.bell.ca [70.27.195.174]) by power.freeradius.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E457922400FF; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:15:29 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <532B3040.102@deployingradius.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 14:15:28 -0400
From: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
References: <53285DE2.9040802@cisco.com> <035801cf42d2$99464b80$cbd2e280$@augustcellars.com> <5328C172.5080305@deployingradius.com> <14050.1395325355@sandelman.ca> <532B0083.7050606@deployingradius.com> <31142.1395339121@sandelman.ca>
In-Reply-To: <31142.1395339121@sandelman.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/radext/_jQz-mIu8d3UJ7fW8MWH42vk_6U
Cc: radext@ietf.org
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: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 18:16:28 -0000

Michael Richardson wrote:
> Without the pointer, they won't know they are being stupid.

  Not entirely.  RFC 6929 says that the bits are reserved, and allocated
via IETF consensus.  Any vendor "poaching" on those bits knows a priori
that it's wrong.

  They don't need to read the fragmentation document to know that.

> I think it's a call for your AD to make.
> I think that it's reasonable for it to be an experimental document,

  I agree.

  I'm OK with this doc saying "updates 6929".

  Alan DeKok.