IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [radext] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-radext-coa-proxy-05: (with COMMENT)

"Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Mon, 13 August 2018 13:32 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 AA0C3130DE6 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 06:32:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=ietf@kuehlewind.net header.d=kuehlewind.net
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 3294hBAeMHkc for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 06:32:36 -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 4BF0D130F12 for <radext@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 06:32:36 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=kuehlewind.net; b=BlnTx3XlgX47MJqPHvh7/BoUWxx6KNjVrcOro6TCzu5T4It/bJ2tvN8w37LoLlXuLfjQzVNtODTwZqXkGN5JIqNDwEspx+TXk4oyMWetzkhWUyPQOXdSDqXHSGiBqiF8GbJIiLArGeWa2oOP4Wiq/ZDi7xW3w9DK924HX0wABJs=; h=Received:Received:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:X-Mailer:X-PPP-Message-ID:X-PPP-Vhost;
Received: (qmail 2650 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2018 15:25:53 +0200
Received: from mue-88-130-61-222.dsl.tropolys.de (HELO ?192.168.178.24?) (88.130.61.222) by kuehlewind.net with ESMTPSA (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted, authenticated); 13 Aug 2018 15:25:53 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: "Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <7C61E065-2EFD-431B-923C-C130B32E35FA@deployingradius.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 15:25:52 +0200
Cc: Winter Stefan <stefan.winter@restena.lu>, radext@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-radext-coa-proxy@ietf.org, radext-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E0754F13-7ECF-4F47-B700-47B1B9B14883@kuehlewind.net>
References: <153416114103.25041.1808333930520958934.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7C61E065-2EFD-431B-923C-C130B32E35FA@deployingradius.com>
To: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-PPP-Message-ID: <20180813132553.2641.5140@lvps83-169-45-111.dedicated.hosteurope.de>
X-PPP-Vhost: kuehlewind.net
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/radext/yDTPa52xvYI_AKCts4742MDfh4s>
Subject: Re: [radext] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-radext-coa-proxy-05: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: radext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 13:32:38 -0000


> Am 13.08.2018 um 14:40 schrieb Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>:
> 
> 
>> On Aug 13, 2018, at 7:52 AM, Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-radext-coa-proxy-05: No Objection
> 
>> Thanks for this well-written doc.
>> 
>> One nit in sec 3.1: s/activee/active/
> 
>  Fixed/
> 
>> One quick question on sec 3.3:
>> "Operator-NAS-Identifier MUST NOT occur more than once in a packet."
>> What happens if it occurs more than once? Just ignore or send an error?
> 
>  Ignore it.   I'll add some text:
> 
> 
> If a packet contains more than one Operator-NAS-Identifier,
> implementations MUST treat the second and subsequent attributes as
> "invalid attributes", as discussed in [RFC6929] Section 2.8.

Thanks, I didn’t check RFC6929 but it probably doesn’t hurt to be clear about this in this document as well.

Mirja

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email