Q on Ver.-05 of draft-ietf-radext-ipv6-access after IETF81 radext session

Question for clarification:

We already have the following Radius Attributes for the address/prefix pools:

Framed-Pool (88, section 5.18 of RFC2869),

Framed-IPv6-Pool (100, section 2.6 of RFC3162).

http://www.iana.org/assignments/radius-types/radius-types.xml

The foramt are the same as follows:

0 1 2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | String...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

draft-ietf-radext-ipv6-access-05 is proposing 2 new attributes for address/prefix pools:

Delegated-IPv6-Prefix-Pool,
Stateful-IPv6-Address-Pool,

the fomat of these 2 attributes are the same as the above one.

Supposed the above attributes could be explained as follows:

Framed-Pool was designed for the IPv4 address pool;

Framed-IPv6-Pool was designed for the IPv6 SLAAC prefix pool;

Delegated-IPv6-Prefix-Pool is designed for DHCPv6-PD prefix pool;

Stateful-IPv6-Address-Pool is designed for DHCPv6 address pool;

All above attributes are only used to provide the name of the address/prefix pools in a 'string'. I doubt the necessity to make so many 'name' or 'string' attributes for the different address/prefix pools to prevent the ambiguity. I guess 1 attribute for the name of the address/prefix pools might be enough. In fact, the NAS take the role to interpret the meaning of the pook name, right?

I think Framed-Pool can be re-used for the design purpose of Stateful-IPv6-Address-Pool. Do we have any limitation on the usage of Framed-Pool for IPv6?

I think Framed-IPv6-Pool can be re-used for the design purpose of Delegated-IPv6-Prefix-Pool to indicate a pool of IPv6 prefix pool. I could even think Framed-Pool can replace Framed-IPv6-Pool to indicate the name of a IPv6 prefix/address pool per the same logic. Am I right?

Best Regards,

Leaf