%% You should probably cite rfc8559 instead of this I-D. @techreport{ietf-radext-coa-proxy-05, number = {draft-ietf-radext-coa-proxy-05}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-radext-coa-proxy/05/}, author = {Alan DeKok and Jouni Korhonen}, title = {{Dynamic Authorization Proxying in Remote Authorization Dial-In User Service Protocol (RADIUS)}}, pagetotal = 16, year = 2018, month = jul, day = 30, abstract = {RFC 5176 defines Change of Authorization (CoA) and Disconnect Message (DM) behavior for RADIUS. Section 3.1 of that document suggests that proxying these messages is possible, but gives no guidance as to how that is done. This specification corrects that omission for scenarios where networks use Realm-based proxying as defined in {[}RFC7542{]}.}, }