Additional Values for the NAS-Port-Type Attribute
RFC 4603

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, <iana@iana.org>, ietf-announce@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Informational RFC to be: 
         draft-zorn-radius-port-type-05.txt 

The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'Additional Values for 
the NAS-Port-Type Attribute' <draft-zorn-radius-port-type-05.txt> as an 
Informational RFC. 

The IESG would also like the IRSG or RFC-Editor to review the comments in 
the datatracker 
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=12910&rfc_flag=0) 
related to this document and determine whether or not they merit 
incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the ballot 
and the comment log. 

The IESG contact person is Dan Romascanu.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-zorn-radius-port-type-05.txt


The process for such documents is described at http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html.

Thank you,

The IESG Secretary

Ballot Text

Technical Summary
 
  This document defines a set of new values for the NAS-Port-Type
  RADIUS Attribute.
 
Working Group Summary
 
 
  This is not a WG document, but an independent submission via
  RFC-Editor. The AAA Doctors group and RADEXT WG chairs have been 
  consulted if this work conflicts with current IETF work.
 
Protocol Quality
 
  AAA-doctors conclude:
  This document simply requires Designated Expert Review of the
  port type values prior to IANA assignment.  It appears
  that the new port type values are sufficiently well defined
  by reference to existing RFCs.

Note to RFC Editor
 
 Pls insert IESG note number 2 of section 4 in RFC3932.

IESG Note


      This RFC is not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard.
      The IETF disclaims any knowledge of the fitness of this RFC for
      any purpose and in particular notes that the decision to publish
      is not based on IETF review for such things as security,
      congestion control, or inappropriate interaction with deployed
      protocols.  The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at
      its discretion.  Readers of this document should exercise caution
      in evaluating its value for implementation and deployment.  See
      RFC 3932 for more information.

RFC Editor Note