Subject: Re: [radext] #135: Server policy handling should be informative

From: "radext issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 18:45:58 -0000

#135: Server policy handling should be informative

Changes (by [email-masked]):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => wontfix

Comment:

 I'm not sure what is meant here.  In order for transition to happen, each
 server needs to track whether or not the client has performed DTLS.  This
 section documents that, along with the administrative policy for migrating
 to DTLS.

 So the text seems to address these concerns already.

 I don't see how else a server can track DTLS.  If there's an
 administrative policy, it has to be represented as a flag related to
 "DTLS".  That's what this section does.

-- 
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:               |       Owner:  draft-ietf-radext-
  [email-masked]     |  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect       |      Status:  closed
 Priority:  major        |   Milestone:
Component:  dtls         |     Version:
 Severity:  -            |  Resolution:  wontfix
 Keywords:               |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/radext/trac/ticket/135#comment:1>
radext <http://tools.ietf.org/radext/>