Dynamic Disconnect
draft-chiba-radius-dynamic-disconnect-00

bernard sez:
Actually, I believe that the functionality in the dynamic disconnect draft
is now subsumed within draft-chiba-radius-dynamic-authorization-06.txt,
no?

If necessary, we could put out a Proposed Standard draft that does nothing
but allocate Command Codes. In fact, I think we need something like this
anyway, because the original RFC 2865 IANA considerations section no
longer functions since it depended on the RADIUS WG mailing list, which is
now defunct. So we could do an IANA Considerations Update as a PS,
and allocate the required command codes at the same time.

bernard sez:
This draft describes an existing practice, and so it represents
documentation of what is in place, rather than a new proposal. It
is somewhat vague in places, and might benefit from more
discussion, so as to clearly delineate the limitations of the
approach, some of which are unique to RADIUS (e.g. UDP transport
and resulting packet loss). I don't know that it really deserves to
be a Proposed Standard (RADIUS Accounting, RFC 2866 isn't), but an
IETF last call probably couldn't hurt. Since this is a description
of something that's already deployed by multiple vendors, it is not
the kind of thing that would benefit much from WG discussion. It
also contains a more detailed specification of RADIUS over IPsec
than RFC 3162.

State Changes to Defer                                            from Reading List                                      by randy

State Changes to Reading List                                      from AD to write --Don't publish                      by scoya

State Changes to AD to write --Don't publish                      from Reading List                                      by scoya

State Changes to Reading List                                      from New Version Needed (WG/Author)                    by randy

State Changes to New Version Needed (WG/Author)                    from AD to write --Don't publish                      by Randy Bush