Re: RADEXT Issue 148 Item 6

[Barney Wolff <barney@databus.com>]

On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 06:39:26PM +0200, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> 
> Interoperability means that the document is clear enough so that two
> different implementers can create two distinct implementations that
> result in the same counter values for any given mix of well-formed and
> malformed packets. Different implementations following the text in the
> documents MUST NOT result in different counter values. 

Why?  What harm would result, to users or providers, if two implementations
produced somewhat different counts?  For that matter, what harm would
result, to users or providers, if two implementations differed somewhat
in how strict their interpretations of "well-formed" on receipt were?
Is every implementation required to be a conformance test suite?

I imagine we would all agree that a conformant implementation MUST NOT
*send* malformed packets, and MUST NOT crash or loop on receipt of any
packet.

Seems to me that the only important criterion for counting malformed
packets is that the count MUST reflect how many packets were handled
as malformed.

Regards,
Barney

--
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/>