Subject: [radext] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-radext-ip-port-radius-ext-15: (with COMMENT)

From: "Alissa Cooper" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2016 08:17:26 -0700

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-radext-ip-port-radius-ext-15: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-radext-ip-port-radius-ext/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for responding to my DISCUSS and COMMENT. I understand that this
document is not the appropriate place to specify error handling related
to these attributes. I do still think adding a note about the potential
consequences of communicating erroneous port range and port mapping
information would be a good precaution here. 

In 3.2.11 the new text helps but I think there are a couple more changes
necessary to make the constraints explicit:

OLD
localID

      string.  The data type of this field is string (refer to
      [I-D.ietf-radext-datatypes]).  This field contains the data that
      is a local session identifier at the customer premise, such as MAC
      address, interface ID, VLAN ID, PPP sessions ID, VRF ID, IP
      address/prefix, etc.

   IP-Port-Local-Id TLV MAY be included in the following Attributes:

NEW
localID

      string.  The data type of this field is string (refer to
      [I-D.ietf-radext-datatypes]).  This field contains the data that
      is a local session identifier at the customer premise, such as MAC
      address, interface ID, VLAN ID, PPP sessions ID, VRF ID, IP
      address/prefix, or another local session identifier.

   IP-Port-Local-Id TLV MAY be included in the following Attributes if it
is necessary to identify the subscriber:

---

From: Dean cheng <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 23:45:00 +0000

Hi Alissa,

Thanks for your comment. Please see below inlines.

Regards
Dean

> -----Original Message-----
> From: radext [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Alissa
> Cooper
> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 8:17 AM
> To: The IESG
> Cc: [email-masked];
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: [radext] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-radext-ip-
> port-radius-ext-15: (with COMMENT)
> 

Agreed, and we added a new paragraph for this in Section 6 of 15.txt.

> 
> In 3.2.11 the new text helps but I think there are a couple more
> changes necessary to make the constraints explicit:
> 
> OLD
> localID
> 
>    IP-Port-Local-Id TLV MAY be included in the following Attributes if
> it is necessary to identify the subscriber:
> 
We'll update the text as suggested in the next revision
(after the IESG teleconference on Nov. 3rd).

> 
> _______________________________________________
> radext mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext