RE: RADEXT Issue 148 Item 6

["Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <dromasca@avaya.com>]

>   Recognizing that the counters are implementation-dependent 
> is a good idea.  Recommending behavior is a good idea.
> 

Alan,

What do you mean by counters being 'implementation-dependent'? Two
different implementations will count the same thing? If so fine,
otherwise we have a problem. 

Consistent definition of the MIB objects leading to interoperable
management applications is not a recommendation, but a mandatory
requirement. 

Regards,

Dan


 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alan DeKok
> Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 7:59 PM
> To: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: RADEXT Issue 148 Item 6 
> 
> "Nelson, David" <dnelson@enterasys.com> wrote:
> > And the inference is that the recommended or suggested VSA 
> format in 
> > RFC
> > 2865 is not sufficient to establish syntax rules for VSAs, is that 
> > right?  I think that Alan DeKok's position is that some 
> > implementations chose to interpret the VSA suggestions as syntax 
> > rules, and enforce them as such.
> 
>   Yes.  Without a clear definition of "malformed", those 
> implementations are compatible with the specs.  Unless we 
> choose to define "malformed" in the MIB documents, we cannot 
> label those implementations as non-compliant.
> 
> > I think Alan's suggestion was (a).
> 
>   Yes.  The counting method used for "malformed" is 
> implementation-dependent.  As is the counting method for all 
> other counters, too (barring standardized test vectors).
> 
> > (b) is to be desired, but it will likely draw criticism from those 
> > whose implementations don't match the new normative definition of 
> > "malformed".  While the "legislative intent" information from the 
> > RADIUS WG deliberations is enlightening and instructive, at 
> the end of 
> > the day we are left with the text that was actually incorporated in 
> > the RFCs.
> 
>   Recognizing that the counters are implementation-dependent 
> is a good idea.  Recommending behavior is a good idea.
> 
>   We can recognize that there is no definition of 
> "malformed", that the counters are implementation-dependent, 
> and then recommend that the contents of VSA's are out of 
> scope of the counter.
> 
>   Alan DeKok.
> 
> --
> to unsubscribe send a message to 
> radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with the word 'unsubscribe' in 
> a single line as the message text body.
> archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>
> 

--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>