Dynamic Authorization Extensions to Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)
draft-ietf-radext-rfc3576bis-13
Yes
(Dan Romascanu)
No Objection
(Chris Newman)
(Cullen Jennings)
(David Ward)
(Jari Arkko)
(Lars Eggert)
(Lisa Dusseault)
(Magnus Westerlund)
(Mark Townsley)
(Ron Bonica)
(Ross Callon)
(Tim Polk)
Abstain
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 13 and is now closed.
Dan Romascanu Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Chris Newman Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Cullen Jennings Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
David Ward Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Lars Eggert Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Lisa Dusseault Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Mark Townsley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ross Callon Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Russ Housley Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2007-10-17)
Unknown
From Gen-ART Review by Ben Campbell. In Section 3.2, It would be helpful to mention how Authorize Only is used to ease mapping to Diameter, and reference the Diameter Considerations section. As it is, the reader wonders what the semantic effect of the resulting Access-Request message is supposed to be. Section 6.2, 4th paragraph, raises a question. Can a proxy be expected to easily know if it is one-hop away from the NAS? Is the mechanism for determining this well-known or documented somewhere that could be referenced here?
Tim Polk Former IESG member
(was No Record, Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2007-10-17)
Unknown
The figures in sections 2.1 and 2.2 use Disconnect-Response and CoA-Response as shorthand
for "Disconnect-ACK or Disconnect-NAK" and "CoA-ACK or CoA-NAK" respectively. These
terms are never defined, and in fact are never used again. I can't claim it was too hard to figure
out, but it might be better if the meaning was explicitly stated.
Perhaps the terms could be introduced in the text following the figures and implicitly defined
in a parenthetical, in the same way that "Response packet" was introduced in section 2.3:
The Authenticator field in a Response Packet (e.g. Disconnect-ACK,
Disconnect-NAK, CoA-ACK, or CoA-NAK).
Sam Hartman Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
Abstain
Abstain
(2007-10-26)
Unknown
Getting my discuss addressed would likely take more time with this set of authors and chairs than is worthwhile.