[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: subtypes (was: HTTP digest and RADIUS; new version of the Sterman draft)
This is exactly why we need to ensure interoperability. If we extend RADIUS in
ways which would require RADIUS servers to be recoded, what is gained? I think
that if Extension X provides the exact same functionality as VSA y, what is
the need to support Extension X? At in the GSMA, 3GPP, 3GPP2 and enterprise
sphere, many vendors are implementing VSAs - even VSAs not specified by
themselves. I know in the enterprise sphere, vendors implement VSAs which
are specified by competitors all of the time.
I think that we must propose extensions for some service-specific areas
to vendors may implemet it in their products. So, SIP or WiFi specific
attributes must be equal for all products from all vendors.
And because we have VSA and VendorId=0 treat as standard RADIUS we can
use this to extend attribute space. But current VSA has only 255 byte
length attribute value. But new services require large attribute value
So, we can propose new extension with new attribute where we can join
large attribute values or propose new RADIUS behaviour for VSA with
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.