[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Questions on modified Extended Attribute format?
Regarding allowing legacy attributes to be grouped within the extended
Lets look at it from a practical perspective. If I am writing a new
"Application" which will use grouping and I need to encode the IP
address of the NAS.
In Glen's proposal I would reuse the existing attribute NAS-IP vs. what
others are saying I would have to create a new attribute called
New-NAS-IP and include that in the grouped attribute.
Glen's approach *seems* more appropriate no?
I dont understand Alan's comment. The NAS-IP that appears in the RADIUS
message is semantically different then the NAS-IP attribute that is
going to be grouped. The semantics for the former case is defined by
RFC2865 and the semantics of the later case would be defined by a new
This is no different in Diameter. An attribute can appear standalone
and also be included in a group (for that matter, in many groups). The
definition of the attribute is the same in both cases, but the semantics
is different right?
So what am I missing?
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.