IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [radext] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-radext-datatypes-06: (with COMMENT)

"Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Wed, 12 October 2016 14:29 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: radext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: radext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD41612973A for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 07:29:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 L75kZSUY1iaE for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 07:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kuehlewind.net (kuehlewind.net [83.169.45.111]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AF1F12978B for <radext@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 07:29:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 3466 invoked from network); 12 Oct 2016 16:22:17 +0200
Received: from public-docking-pat-etx-mapped-0029.ethz.ch (HELO ?10.2.118.142?) (195.176.110.254) by kuehlewind.net with ESMTPSA (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted, authenticated); 12 Oct 2016 16:22:16 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: "Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <3C315C09-71A7-46B6-AFE5-14EA35D6F256@deployingradius.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 16:22:16 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5E5B67F0-FA14-432E-8C79-92C68CDA47D7@kuehlewind.net>
References: <147142512074.12181.7172134882556272250.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAHbuEH5j1-0DJD=yz4KmZR4uwbLpuc-ReETxgyMcZ2pQM2S_6Q@mail.gmail.com> <3C315C09-71A7-46B6-AFE5-14EA35D6F256@deployingradius.com>
To: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/radext/bTgi7b3HVUWp3emvZvlnyokfW4s>
Cc: Winter Stefan <stefan.winter@restena.lu>, radext@ietf.org, draft-ietf-radext-datatypes@ietf.org, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, radext-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [radext] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-radext-datatypes-06: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: radext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 14:29:05 -0000

Hi,

see below.

> Am 12.10.2016 um 16:08 schrieb Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>:
> 
> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> "As RADIUS does not encode information about data types in a packet, the
>> numbers assigned to a data type will never occur in a packet."
>> Given the Name must be unique, I don't see why a Value field is needed.
> 
>  It's not.  It's just useful to do.
> 
>  In the future, we may want to use the numbers, so we might as well assign them now.

Not a big issue. However I don’t see a case where this could be used in future, so I would say it is just not useful to do…

Mirja


> 
>> Related: There is an inconsitency between section 4.1 and 6 regarding the
>> use of Description/Name.
> 
>  Fixed, thanks.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email