[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: RADEXT charter for comment...
Joel Halpern writes...
> If we want this restriction to say that sub-attributes shall use VSAs
> a specified vendor-ID, then we need to say that. (I hope not.)
I think that the notion is that sub-attributes may be encapsulated in
the VSA attribute or in a new, but similar, SDO-Specific Attribute
(SSA). I interpret the formatting restrictions to be the same for
either VSA or SSA, with the difference that anyone can create VSAs, and
the format shown in RFC 2865 is a SHOULD, while only SDOs can create
SSAs, and the format shown in RFC 2865 (for VSAs) is a MUST. Whether
the SSA shares the type code of 26 with VSA and is only distinguished by
the OUI value (belonging to an SDO), or has a distinct type code is, up
> If we want this restriction to say that for consistency with the VSA
> in 2865, all sub-attributes shall be one level deep, we should say
I would very much like to say that.
> I think that the sentence as written does not say what we mean.
I guess that was the basis of my comment, seeking a clarification.
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.