Re: [radext] radius-fragmentation: New flag T field for the Long Extended Type

"Jim Schaad" <ietf@augustcellars.com> Tue, 04 March 2014 17:40 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@augustcellars.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 4760E1A01B0 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Mar 2014 09:40:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 neGvR706DK67 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Mar 2014 09:40:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp4.pacifier.net (smtp4.pacifier.net [64.255.237.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA8911A0267 for <radext@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Mar 2014 09:40:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Philemon (c-24-17-142-118.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [24.17.142.118]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp4.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5292738EF3; Tue, 4 Mar 2014 09:40:15 -0800 (PST)
From: "Jim Schaad" <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: "'Alan DeKok'" <aland@deployingradius.com>, <lionel.morand@orange.com>
References: <53107CBB.3020407@um.es> <53134D64.7080304@restena.lu> <53143367.6090001@um.es> <tsl61nvei02.fsf@mit.edu> <5314505E.3010200@deployingradius.com> <531452FC.6090704@um.es> <5314C5FE.3070403@deployingradius.com> <16313_1393946553_5315EFB9_16313_924_1_6B7134B31289DC4FAF731D844122B36E4DF643@PEXCVZYM13.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <5315F255.3050309@deployingradius.com>
In-Reply-To: <5315F255.3050309@deployingradius.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 09:38:30 -0800
Message-ID: <00ca01cf37d0$8f440a80$adcc1f80$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQI6l18P2VVlfJqaXuarwB9cTp47pgHJn+e/AmvLFeABBea3jAFr7drfAQvUsh4C4r+fqQGEg1obAqTgyNCZhHhnAA==
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/radext/cqWN8d1PKXlQYIcVzBW0BOMIx5Y
Cc: 'Sam Hartman' <hartmans@painless-security.com>, radext@ietf.org, 'Alejandro Perez Mendez' <alex@um.es>, 'Stefan Winter' <stefan.winter@restena.lu>
Subject: Re: [radext] radius-fragmentation: New flag T field for the Long Extended Type
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, 04 Mar 2014 17:40:21 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: radext [mailto:radext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alan DeKok
> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 7:34 AM
> To: lionel.morand@orange.com
> Cc: Sam Hartman; Stefan Winter; Alejandro Perez Mendez; radext@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [radext] radius-fragmentation: New flag T field for the Long
> Extended Type
> 
> lionel.morand@orange.com wrote:
> > The question is simple: how do we ensure that another draft will not
> allocate the same 2nd bit to another feature? It would mean that the same
> Long-extended-type attribute would have two possible
> interpretations/process...
> 
>   I think we're safe with manual tracking.  I don't see any other draft
allocating
> the same bit.
> 
> > Are we only relying on living memories? :)
> 
>   The documents are available on a public web page as part of the RFC
> process.
> 
> > Maybe we don't care because it is an experimental document... or maybe
> this doc will update the RFC6929 to indicate that the 2nd bit is used for
"T".
> 
>   We can't have an experimental draft update a standards track document.

For this type of update, I see no reason this draft cannot  update  the
standards track document.  It is not changing any significant content in
that draft.

Jim

> 
>   Alan DeKok.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> radext mailing list
> radext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext