Re: [radext] #160: Section 2.1
"radext issue tracker" <trac+radext@trac.tools.ietf.org> Sun, 09 June 2013 13:31 UTC
Return-Path: <trac+radext@trac.tools.ietf.org>
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 6FFDD21F9050 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Jun 2013 06:31:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.443
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.443 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.144, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_NAIL=2.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oL7b7pyq5Xe6 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Jun 2013 06:31:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FE9521F8AF4 for <radext@ietf.org>; Sun, 9 Jun 2013 06:31:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51360 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <trac+radext@trac.tools.ietf.org>) id 1Ulfid-00039e-Ea; Sun, 09 Jun 2013 15:31:39 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: radext issue tracker <trac+radext@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software
To: draft-ietf-radext-nai@tools.ietf.org, aland@deployingradius.com
X-Trac-Project: radext
Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2013 13:31:39 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/radext/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/radext/trac/ticket/160#comment:1
Message-ID: <081.a11f62ff893c4d85509d1708cfa2a9c5@trac.tools.ietf.org>
References: <066.ec6beb4d1d3a00e2637b5a422c880fed@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 160
In-Reply-To: <066.ec6beb4d1d3a00e2637b5a422c880fed@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: draft-ietf-radext-nai@tools.ietf.org, aland@deployingradius.com, radext@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+radext@trac.tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Resent-To: aland@freeradius.org
Resent-Message-Id: <20130609133141.1FE9521F8AF4@ietfa.amsl.com>
Resent-Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2013 06:31:41 -0700
Resent-From: trac+radext@trac.tools.ietf.org
Cc: radext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [radext] #160: Section 2.1
X-BeenThere: radext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Reply-To: radext@ietf.org
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: Sun, 09 Jun 2013 13:31:42 -0000
#160: Section 2.1 Changes (by aland@deployingradius.com): * status: new => closed * resolution: => invalid Comment: The first sentence of the quoted text addresses your concern in your first sentence. Many uses of PPP, EAP, and other network access protocols do allow an NAI to be transported. This document tries to say that using the NAI is preferable to using a gratuitously incompatible user identifier. -- -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: | Owner: draft-ietf-radext- bernard_aboba@hotmail.com | nai@tools.ietf.org Type: defect | Status: closed Priority: critical | Milestone: milestone1 Component: nai | Version: 1.0 Severity: In WG Last Call | Resolution: invalid Keywords: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/radext/trac/ticket/160#comment:1> radext <http://tools.ietf.org/radext/>
- [radext] #160: Section 2.1 radext issue tracker
- Re: [radext] #160: Section 2.1 radext issue tracker