Common Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS) Implementation Issues and Suggested Fixes
RFC 5080
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 08 and is now closed.
Lars Eggert (was Discuss) No Objection
(Cullen Jennings; former steering group member) Yes
(Dan Romascanu; former steering group member) Yes
(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) (was Discuss) Yes
> The CPE may also require a delegated prefix for its own use, if it is > decrementing the Time To Live (TTL) field of IP headers. In that > case, it should be delegated a prefix by the NAS via the Delegated- > IPv6-Prefix attribute. [RFC4818]. If the CPE is not decrementing > TTL, it does not require a delegated prefix. Time To Live is called Hop Limit in IPv6, and since this is an IPv6 specific Section, perhaps this is the name that you should use.
(Chris Newman; former steering group member) No Objection
Editorial: > inclusion of an Event-Timestampt attribute, for example, then s/Event-Timestampt/Event-Timestamp/
(David Ward; former steering group member) No Objection
(Jon Peterson; former steering group member) No Objection
(Lisa Dusseault; former steering group member) No Objection
(Magnus Westerlund; former steering group member) No Objection
(Mark Townsley; former steering group member) No Objection
(Ron Bonica; former steering group member) No Objection
(Sam Hartman; former steering group member) No Objection
I am concerned about how this draft seems to break the ability to negotiate future extensions. In particular the recommendation that client should treat access-accept with unknown attributes as access-reject seems problematic. However this issue seems to have been discussed sufficiently so this is only a comment.
(Tim Polk; former steering group member) No Objection
I personally find this text in the last sentence in section 2.1.1 to be unclear: "neither including an authentication attribute nor a Service-Type attribute" I suggest rewriting this sentence, deleting the double negative for clarity.