From dromasca@avaya.com Fri Dec 9 09:28:22 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5613121F8488; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 09:28:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.398 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.201, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u4A92uU-lcH3; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 09:28:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98CC221F843B; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 09:28:17 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhwFAI1E4k7GmAcF/2dsb2JhbABDhQaZUYsJgRiBBYFyAQEBAQMSEQ0EUQYBCA0IBQIGBgwLAQICAwEfJQcBBgQBBAESCBqiJolukSyBNIkoM2MEmlyEfoc+ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,327,1320642000"; d="scan'208";a="281240947" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 09 Dec 2011 12:28:11 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.12]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 09 Dec 2011 12:25:39 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 18:28:08 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for the December 15, 2011 IESG Teleconference Thread-Index: Acy1/oQ75xzN17rQRGC+iHR1+jsOMgAmRpbg From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , , , "IETF DNS Directorate" , "YANG Doctors" Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for the December 15, 2011 IESG Teleconference X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 17:28:22 -0000 DQpQbGVhc2UgZmluZCBiZWxvdyB0aGUgYWdlbmRhIG9mIHRoZSBJRVNHIHRlbGVjaGF0IG9uIDEy LzE1LiBQbGVhc2Ugc2VuZCB5b3VyIHF1ZXN0aW9ucywgY29tbWVudHMgYW5kIGNvbmNlcm5zIGJl Zm9yZSAxMi8xNCBDT0IuIA0KDQpUaGFua3MgYW5kIFJlZ2FyZHMsDQoNCkRhbg0KDQoNCg0KLS0t LS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCkZyb206IGllc2ctYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZyBbbWFp bHRvOmllc2ctYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZ10gT24gQmVoYWxmIE9mIElFU0cgU2VjcmV0YXJ5DQoN Cg0KMi4gUHJvdG9jb2wgQWN0aW9ucw0KMi4xIFdHIFN1Ym1pc3Npb25zDQoyLjEuMSBOZXcgSXRl bXMNCg0KICBvIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtbDN2cG4tb3NwZnYzLXBlY2UtMTANCiAgICBPU1BGdjMgYXMg YSBQRS1DRSByb3V0aW5nIHByb3RvY29sIChQcm9wb3NlZCBTdGFuZGFyZCkNCiAgICBOb3RlOiBC ZW4gTml2ZW4tSmVua2lucyAoYmVuQG5pdmVuLWplbmtpbnMuY28udWspIGlzIHRoZSBEb2N1bWVu dA0KICAgIFNoZXBoZXJkDQogICAgVG9rZW46IFN0ZXdhcnQgQnJ5YW50DQoNCiAgbyBkcmFmdC1p ZXRmLWdlb3ByaXYtZGVyZWYtcHJvdG9jb2wtMDQNCiAgICBBIExvY2F0aW9uIERlcmVmZXJlbmNp bmcgUHJvdG9jb2wgVXNpbmcgSEVMRCAoUHJvcG9zZWQgU3RhbmRhcmQpDQogICAgTm90ZTogUmlj aGFyZCBCYXJuZXMgKHJiYXJuZXNAYmJuLmNvbSkgaXMgdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50IHNoZXBoZXJkLg0K ICAgIFRva2VuOiBSb2JlcnQgU3BhcmtzDQoNCiAgbyBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWdlb3ByaXYtcG9saWN5 LXVyaS0wNA0KICAgIExvY2F0aW9uIENvbmZpZ3VyYXRpb24gRXh0ZW5zaW9ucyBmb3IgUG9saWN5 IE1hbmFnZW1lbnQgKFByb3Bvc2VkDQogICAgU3RhbmRhcmQpDQogICAgTm90ZTogQWxpc3NhIENv b3BlciAoYWNvb3BlckBjZHQub3JnKSBpcyB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQgc2hlcGhlcmQuDQogICAgVG9r ZW46IFJvYmVydCBTcGFya3MNCg0KICBvIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtdjZvcHMtaGFwcHktZXllYmFsbHMt MDYNCiAgICBIYXBweSBFeWViYWxsczogU3VjY2VzcyB3aXRoIER1YWwtU3RhY2sgSG9zdHMgKFBy b3Bvc2VkIFN0YW5kYXJkKQ0KICAgIE5vdGU6IEZyZWQgQmFrZXIgKGZyZWQuYmFrZXJAY2lzY28u Y29tKSBpcyB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQgc2hlcGhlcmQuDQogICAgVG9rZW46IFJvbiBCb25pY2ENCg0K ICBvIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtc2ltcGxlLW1zcnAtY2VtYS0wMw0KICAgIENvbm5lY3Rpb24gRXN0YWJs aXNobWVudCBmb3IgTWVkaWEgQW5jaG9yaW5nIChDRU1BKSBmb3IgdGhlIE1lc3NhZ2UNCiAgICBT ZXNzaW9uIFJlbGF5IFByb3RvY29sIChNU1JQKSAoUHJvcG9zZWQgU3RhbmRhcmQpDQogICAgTm90 ZTogSGlzaGFtIEtoYXJ0YWJpbCAoaGlzaGFtLmtoYXJ0YWJpbEBnbWFpbC5jb20pIGlzIHRoZSBk b2N1bWVudA0KICAgIHNoZXBoZXJkLg0KICAgIFRva2VuOiBHb256YWxvIENhbWFyaWxsbw0KDQog IG8gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi10Y3BtLXJmYzM3ODItYmlzLTA0DQogICAgVGhlIE5ld1Jlbm8gTW9kaWZp Y2F0aW9uIHRvIFRDUCdzIEZhc3QgUmVjb3ZlcnkgQWxnb3JpdGhtIChQcm9wb3NlZA0KICAgIFN0 YW5kYXJkKQ0KICAgIE5vdGU6IERhdmlkIEJvcm1hbiAoZGF2aWQuYm9ybWFuQHdpbmRyaXZlci5j b20pIGlzIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudA0KICAgIHNoZXBoZXJkLg0KICAgIFRva2VuOiBXZXNsZXkgRWRk eQ0KDQoyLjEuMiBSZXR1cm5pbmcgSXRlbXMNCg0KICBOT05FDQoNCjIuMiBJbmRpdmlkdWFsIFN1 Ym1pc3Npb25zDQoyLjIuMSBOZXcgSXRlbXMNCg0KICBOT05FDQoNCjIuMi4yIFJldHVybmluZyBJ dGVtcw0KDQogIG8gZHJhZnQtd2VpbC1zaGFyZWQtdHJhbnNpdGlvbi1zcGFjZS1yZXF1ZXN0LTEw DQogICAgSUFOQSBSZXNlcnZlZCBJUHY0IFByZWZpeCBmb3IgU2hhcmVkIENHTiBTcGFjZSAoQkNQ KQ0KICAgIFRva2VuOiBSb24gQm9uaWNhDQogICAgV2FzIGRlZmVycmVkIGJ5IFBldGVyIFNhaW50 LUFuZHJlIG9uIDIwMTEtMTItMDENCg0KMy4gRG9jdW1lbnQgQWN0aW9ucw0KMy4xIFdHIFN1Ym1p c3Npb25zDQozLjEuMSBOZXcgSXRlbXMNCg0KICBvIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtY2NhbXAtd3Nvbi1pbXBh aXJtZW50cy0wOA0KICAgIEEgRnJhbWV3b3JrIGZvciB0aGUgQ29udHJvbCBvZiBXYXZlbGVuZ3Ro IFN3aXRjaGVkIE9wdGljYWwgTmV0d29ya3MNCiAgICAoV1NPTikgd2l0aCBJbXBhaXJtZW50cyAo SW5mb3JtYXRpb25hbCkNCiAgICBOb3RlOiBEZWJvcmFoIEJydW5nYXJkIChkYnJ1bmdhcmRAYXR0 LmNvbSkgaXMgdGhlIERvY3VtZW50IFNoZXBoZXJkLg0KICAgIFRva2VuOiBBZHJpYW4gRmFycmVs DQoNCiAgbyBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLXBwc3AtcHJvYmxlbS1zdGF0ZW1lbnQtMDcNCiAgICBQcm9ibGVt IFN0YXRlbWVudCBvZiBQZWVyLXRvLVBlZXIgU3RyZWFtaW5nIFByb3RvY29sIChQUFNQKQ0KICAg IChJbmZvcm1hdGlvbmFsKQ0KICAgIE5vdGU6IE1hcnRpbiBTdGllbWVybGluZyAobWFydGluLnN0 aWVtZXJsaW5nQG5lY2xhYi5ldSkgaXMgdGhlDQogICAgZG9jdW1lbnQgc2hlcGhlcmQuDQogICAg VG9rZW46IFdlc2xleSBFZGR5DQoNCjMuMS4yIFJldHVybmluZyBJdGVtcw0KDQogIE5PTkUNCg0K My4yIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgU3VibWlzc2lvbnMgVmlhIEFEDQozLjIuMSBOZXcgSXRlbXMNCg0KICBv IGRyYWZ0LWdlcmhhcmRzLXN5c2xvZy1wbGFpbi10Y3AtMTINCiAgICBUcmFuc21pc3Npb24gb2Yg U3lzbG9nIE1lc3NhZ2VzIG92ZXIgVENQIChJbmZvcm1hdGlvbmFsKQ0KICAgIFRva2VuOiBEYW4g Um9tYXNjYW51DQoNCiAgbyBkcmFmdC1vcmVpcmRhbi1tb2R5LWJvdC1yZW1lZGlhdGlvbi0xOA0K ICAgIFJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9ucyBmb3IgdGhlIFJlbWVkaWF0aW9uIG9mIEJvdHMgaW4gSVNQIE5l dHdvcmtzDQogICAgKEluZm9ybWF0aW9uYWwpDQogICAgVG9rZW46IFN0ZXBoZW4gRmFycmVsbA0K ICAgIFdhcyBkZWZlcnJlZCBieSBSb24gQm9uaWNhIG9uIDIwMTEtMTEtMzANCg0KMy4yLjIgUmV0 dXJuaW5nIEl0ZW1zDQoNCiAgTk9ORQ0KDQozLjMgSVJURiBhbmQgSW5kZXBlbmRlbnQgU3VibWlz c2lvbiBTdHJlYW0gRG9jdW1lbnRzDQozLjMuMSBOZXcgSXRlbXMNCg0KICBOT05FDQoNCjMuMy4y IFJldHVybmluZyBJdGVtcw0KDQogIE5PTkUNCg0KMy4zLjMgRm9yIEFjdGlvbg0KDQogIG8gZHJh ZnQtbWNrZW56aWUtYXJwYW5ldC1ob3N0LWhvc3QtcHJvdG9jb2wtMDENCiAgICBIb3N0L0hvc3Qg UHJvdG9jb2wgZm9yIHRoZSBBUlBBIE5ldHdvcmsgKEhpc3RvcmljKQ0KICAgIE5vdGU6IElTRSBk b2N1bWVudA0KICAgIFRva2VuOiBSdXNzIEhvdXNsZXkNCg0KNC4gV29ya2luZyBHcm91cCBBY3Rp b25zDQo0LjEgV0cgQ3JlYXRpb24NCjQuMS4xIFByb3Bvc2VkIGZvciBJRVRGIFJldmlldw0KDQog IE5PTkUNCg0KNC4xLjIgUHJvcG9zZWQgZm9yIEFwcHJvdmFsDQoNCiAgTk9ORQ0KDQo0LjIgV0cg UmVjaGFydGVyaW5nDQo0LjIuMSBVbmRlciBFdmFsdWF0aW9uIGZvciBJRVRGIFJldmlldw0KDQog IE5PTkUNCg0KNC4yLjIgUHJvcG9zZWQgZm9yIEFwcHJvdmFsDQoNCiAgTk9ORQ0KDQoNCg== From dromasca@avaya.com Mon Dec 19 00:06:32 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 700B121F852E for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:06:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n8avlhGtK25g for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:06:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com [135.11.29.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B4B221F8514 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:06:30 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ArgAAAvw7k6HCzI1/2dsb2JhbABDgk6YQogpiCSBBYFyAQEBAQMBAQEPCgEQAz4dAQgNBAQBAQsGDAsBBwElHwcBAQUFBBMIGodgmB2EE5sCiyFjBI85izOMQQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,375,1320642000"; d="txt'?scan'208,217";a="222964730" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 19 Dec 2011 03:06:28 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.12]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 19 Dec 2011 02:54:04 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CCBE25.1B8FE5CE" Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:06:25 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms Thread-Index: AQFKYrZAlXF7nCRrq/Coh00IkY6zAJblOBUQgADYoOCAAXPX4A== From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:06:32 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCBE25.1B8FE5CE Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_002_01CCBE25.1B8FE5CE" ------_=_NextPart_002_01CCBE25.1B8FE5CE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think that this thread on the abfab mail list is of interest for the AAA Doctors.=20 =20 Regards, =20 Dan =20 =20 =20 From: abfab-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:abfab-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 11:55 AM To: ext Jim Schaad; abfab@ietf.org Subject: Re: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =20 Hi Jim,=20 =20 I thought that the chairs will re-issue a call for the Diameter part and then make a decision.=20 Am I wrong?=20 =20 Ciao Hannes =20 =20 From: ext Jim Schaad [mailto:ietf@augustcellars.com]=20 Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 11:01 PM To: Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo); abfab@ietf.org Subject: RE: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =20 Given that to date we have very explicitly designed things to work w/ RADIUS and have not taken on the work for Diameter, but that we all say that it should work just fine w/ Diameter. I think that making a statement the first time we use RADIUS that it does not preclude the use of Diameter and then always using RADIUS is fine. =20 From: abfab-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:abfab-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 7:21 AM To: abfab@ietf.org Subject: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =20 Hi Jim,=20 thank you for your detailed review. In issue 12 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/abfab/trac/ticket/12 you wrote: " We have defined a IdP as containing a radius server.=20 Issue #1 is should radius always be capitalized? Issue #2 At this point - should we say that we use the term RADIUS as being either RADIUS or DIAMETER? " Yes, RADIUS should be capitalized. Diameter is not capitalized.=20 Regarding item #2 we have two options: a) We could instead of using the term RADIUS use AAA to refer to both RADIUS and Diameter. b) We could, as you indicate, state that we use the term RADIUS without any loss of generality.=20 I think the question ultimately boils down to what our audience better understands. I don't really know but I prefer (a) since that's what I have done in other docs. Ciao Hannes ------_=_NextPart_002_01CCBE25.1B8FE5CE Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =

I think that this thread on the abfab mail list is of interest for = the AAA Doctors.

 

Regards,

 

Dan

 

 

 

From:= = abfab-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:abfab-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
Sent: Sunday, December = 18, 2011 11:55 AM
To: ext Jim Schaad; = abfab@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS = vs DIAMETER terms

 

Hi Jim,

 

I thought that the chairs will re-issue a call for the Diameter part = and then make a decision.

Am I wrong?

 

Ciao
Hannes

 

 

From:= = ext Jim Schaad [mailto:ietf@augustcellars.com]
Sent: = Saturday, December 17, 2011 11:01 PM
To: Tschofenig, Hannes = (NSN - FI/Espoo); abfab@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [abfab] Issue 12 = - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms

 

Given that to date we have very explicitly designed things to work w/ = RADIUS and  have not taken on the work for Diameter, but that we = all say that it should work just fine w/ Diameter.   I think = that making a statement the first time we use RADIUS that it does not = preclude the use of Diameter and then always using RADIUS is = fine.

 

From:= = abfab-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:abfab-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
Sent: Saturday, = December 17, 2011 7:21 AM
To: = abfab@ietf.org
Subject: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs = DIAMETER terms

 

Hi Jim, =

thank you for your detailed = review.

In issue 12 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/w= g/abfab/trac/ticket/12 you = wrote:

“

We have defined a IdP as containing a = radius server.

Issue #1 is = should radius always be capitalized?

Issue #2 At = this point - should we say that we use the term RADIUS as being either = RADIUS or DIAMETER?

“

Yes, RADIUS should be = capitalized. Diameter is not = capitalized.

Regarding item #2 we have = two options:

a)    &n= bsp; We = could instead of using the term = RADIUS use AAA to refer to both RADIUS and = Diameter.

b)    &n= bsp; We could, = as you indicate, state that we use = the term RADIUS = without any loss of generality.

I think the question = ultimately boils down to what our audience better = understands.

I don’t really know = but I prefer (a) since that’s what I have done in other = docs.

Ciao

Hannes

=
------_=_NextPart_002_01CCBE25.1B8FE5CE-- ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCBE25.1B8FE5CE Content-Type: text/plain; name="ATT9477651.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Description: ATT9477651.txt Content-Disposition: inline; filename="ATT9477651.txt" X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCmFiZmFiIG1h aWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KYWJmYWJAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4v bGlzdGluZm8vYWJmYWINCg== ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCBE25.1B8FE5CE-- From hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com Mon Dec 19 00:09:26 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7973C21F8A7E for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:09:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.041 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.041 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.557, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tvNrjA9uKK-Q for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:09:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (demumfd001.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.32]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B05D521F854D for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:09:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id pBJ89JRk014006 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:09:19 +0100 Received: from DEMUEXC047.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.32.93]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id pBJ89Im2030325; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:09:19 +0100 Received: from FIESEXC035.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.0.25]) by DEMUEXC047.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:09:18 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CCBE25.817840E3" Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:11:09 +0200 Message-ID: <999913AB42CC9341B05A99BBF358718DE3818E@FIESEXC035.nsn-intra.net> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms Thread-Index: AQFKYrZAlXF7nCRrq/Coh00IkY6zAJblOBUQgADYoOCAAXPX4IAAATsQ References: From: "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" To: "ext Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Dec 2011 08:09:18.0950 (UTC) FILETIME=[81E90060:01CCBE25] Subject: Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:09:26 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCBE25.817840E3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Dan,=20 =20 thanks for forwarding the mail. I indeed think that the ABFAB working group should develop solutions not only for RADIUS. For that purpose, it would probably be good to raise a +1 for Diameter when the chairs issue a call for comments. =20 Ciao Hannes =20 =20 From: aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext Romascanu, Dan (Dan) Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 10:06 AM To: aaa-doctors@ietf.org Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =20 I think that this thread on the abfab mail list is of interest for the AAA Doctors.=20 =20 Regards, =20 Dan =20 =20 =20 From: abfab-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:abfab-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 11:55 AM To: ext Jim Schaad; abfab@ietf.org Subject: Re: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =20 Hi Jim,=20 =20 I thought that the chairs will re-issue a call for the Diameter part and then make a decision.=20 Am I wrong?=20 =20 Ciao Hannes =20 =20 From: ext Jim Schaad [mailto:ietf@augustcellars.com]=20 Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 11:01 PM To: Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo); abfab@ietf.org Subject: RE: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =20 Given that to date we have very explicitly designed things to work w/ RADIUS and have not taken on the work for Diameter, but that we all say that it should work just fine w/ Diameter. I think that making a statement the first time we use RADIUS that it does not preclude the use of Diameter and then always using RADIUS is fine. =20 From: abfab-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:abfab-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 7:21 AM To: abfab@ietf.org Subject: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =20 Hi Jim,=20 thank you for your detailed review. In issue 12 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/abfab/trac/ticket/12 you wrote: " We have defined a IdP as containing a radius server.=20 Issue #1 is should radius always be capitalized? Issue #2 At this point - should we say that we use the term RADIUS as being either RADIUS or DIAMETER? " Yes, RADIUS should be capitalized. Diameter is not capitalized.=20 Regarding item #2 we have two options: a) We could instead of using the term RADIUS use AAA to refer to both RADIUS and Diameter. b) We could, as you indicate, state that we use the term RADIUS without any loss of generality.=20 I think the question ultimately boils down to what our audience better understands. I don't really know but I prefer (a) since that's what I have done in other docs. Ciao Hannes ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCBE25.817840E3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =

Hi Dan,

 

thanks for forwarding the mail. I indeed think that the ABFAB working = group should develop solutions not only for RADIUS. For that purpose, it = would probably be good to raise a +1 for Diameter when the chairs issue = a call for comments.

 

Ciao

Hannes

 

 

From:= = aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf Of ext Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Sent: Monday, December = 19, 2011 10:06 AM
To: aaa-doctors@ietf.org
Subject: = [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER = terms

 

I think that this thread on the abfab mail list is of interest for = the AAA Doctors.

 

Regards,

 

Dan

 

 

 

From:= = abfab-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:abfab-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
Sent: Sunday, December = 18, 2011 11:55 AM
To: ext Jim Schaad; = abfab@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS = vs DIAMETER terms

 

Hi Jim,

 

I thought that the chairs will re-issue a call for the Diameter part = and then make a decision.

Am I wrong?

 

Ciao
Hannes

 

 

From:= ext Jim = Schaad [mailto:ietf@augustcellars.com]
Sent: Saturday, = December 17, 2011 11:01 PM
To: Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - = FI/Espoo); abfab@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA = vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms

 

Given that to date we have very explicitly designed things to work w/ = RADIUS and  have not taken on the work for Diameter, but that we = all say that it should work just fine w/ Diameter.   I think = that making a statement the first time we use RADIUS that it does not = preclude the use of Diameter and then always using RADIUS is = fine.

 

From:= = abfab-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:abfab-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
Sent: Saturday, = December 17, 2011 7:21 AM
To: = abfab@ietf.org
Subject: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs = DIAMETER terms

 

Hi Jim,

thank you for = your detailed review.

In issue 12 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/w= g/abfab/trac/ticket/12 you wrote:

“

We have defined a IdP as containing a radius server. =

Issue #1 is = should radius always be capitalized?

Issue #2 At = this point - should we say that we use the term RADIUS as being either = RADIUS or DIAMETER?

“

Yes, RADIUS = should be capitalized. Diameter is = not capitalized.

Regarding item #2 we have = two options:

a)    &n= bsp; We could instead of using the term = RADIUS use AAA to refer to both RADIUS and Diameter.

b)    &n= bsp; We could, as you = indicate, state that we = use the term RADIUS without any = loss of generality.

I think the question = ultimately boils down to what our audience better = understands.

I don’t really know = but I prefer (a) since that’s what I have done in other = docs.

Ciao

Hannes

------_=_NextPart_001_01CCBE25.817840E3-- From dromasca@avaya.com Mon Dec 19 00:10:29 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCC3E21F8A7E for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:10:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cDt+13UcO6P8 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:10:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com [135.11.29.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DDB921F854D for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:10:25 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AsABAAvw7k7GmAcF/2dsb2JhbABDgk6YQogpgXaGLoEFgXIBAQEBAxIKARADWQIBCA0EBAEBCwYMCwEGAUUIAQgCBAESCBMHh2CcMJsCiyFjBJpsjEE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,375,1320642000"; d="scan'208,217";a="222965057" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 19 Dec 2011 03:10:24 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.12]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 19 Dec 2011 03:07:21 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CCBE25.A8663F58" Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:10:22 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <999913AB42CC9341B05A99BBF358718DE3818E@FIESEXC035.nsn-intra.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms Thread-Index: AQFKYrZAlXF7nCRrq/Coh00IkY6zAJblOBUQgADYoOCAAXPX4IAAATsQgAAACvA= References: <999913AB42CC9341B05A99BBF358718DE3818E@FIESEXC035.nsn-intra.net> From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" , Subject: Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:10:30 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCBE25.A8663F58 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I agree.=20 =20 Dan =20 =20 =20 From: Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) [mailto:hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com]=20 Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 10:11 AM To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); aaa-doctors@ietf.org Subject: RE: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =20 Hi Dan,=20 =20 thanks for forwarding the mail. I indeed think that the ABFAB working group should develop solutions not only for RADIUS. For that purpose, it would probably be good to raise a +1 for Diameter when the chairs issue a call for comments. =20 Ciao Hannes =20 =20 From: aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext Romascanu, Dan (Dan) Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 10:06 AM To: aaa-doctors@ietf.org Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =20 I think that this thread on the abfab mail list is of interest for the AAA Doctors.=20 =20 Regards, =20 Dan =20 =20 =20 From: abfab-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:abfab-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 11:55 AM To: ext Jim Schaad; abfab@ietf.org Subject: Re: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =20 Hi Jim,=20 =20 I thought that the chairs will re-issue a call for the Diameter part and then make a decision.=20 Am I wrong?=20 =20 Ciao Hannes =20 =20 From: ext Jim Schaad [mailto:ietf@augustcellars.com]=20 Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 11:01 PM To: Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo); abfab@ietf.org Subject: RE: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =20 Given that to date we have very explicitly designed things to work w/ RADIUS and have not taken on the work for Diameter, but that we all say that it should work just fine w/ Diameter. I think that making a statement the first time we use RADIUS that it does not preclude the use of Diameter and then always using RADIUS is fine. =20 From: abfab-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:abfab-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 7:21 AM To: abfab@ietf.org Subject: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =20 Hi Jim,=20 thank you for your detailed review. In issue 12 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/abfab/trac/ticket/12 you wrote: " We have defined a IdP as containing a radius server.=20 Issue #1 is should radius always be capitalized? Issue #2 At this point - should we say that we use the term RADIUS as being either RADIUS or DIAMETER? " Yes, RADIUS should be capitalized. Diameter is not capitalized.=20 Regarding item #2 we have two options: a) We could instead of using the term RADIUS use AAA to refer to both RADIUS and Diameter. b) We could, as you indicate, state that we use the term RADIUS without any loss of generality.=20 I think the question ultimately boils down to what our audience better understands. I don't really know but I prefer (a) since that's what I have done in other docs. Ciao Hannes ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCBE25.A8663F58 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms =

I agree.

 

Dan

 

 

 

From:= = Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) [mailto:hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com] =
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 10:11 AM
To: = Romascanu, Dan (Dan); aaa-doctors@ietf.org
Subject: RE: = [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER = terms

 

Hi Dan,

 

thanks for forwarding the mail. I indeed think that the ABFAB working = group should develop solutions not only for RADIUS. For that purpose, it = would probably be good to raise a +1 for Diameter when the chairs issue = a call for comments.

 

Ciao

Hannes

 

 

From:= = aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf Of ext Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Sent: Monday, December = 19, 2011 10:06 AM
To: aaa-doctors@ietf.org
Subject: = [AAA-DOCTORS] FW: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER = terms

 

I think that this thread on the abfab mail list is of interest for = the AAA Doctors.

 

Regards,

 

Dan

 

 

 

From:= = abfab-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:abfab-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
Sent: Sunday, December = 18, 2011 11:55 AM
To: ext Jim Schaad; = abfab@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS = vs DIAMETER terms

 

Hi Jim,

 

I thought that the chairs will re-issue a call for the Diameter part = and then make a decision.

Am I wrong?

 

Ciao
Hannes

 

 

From:= = ext Jim Schaad [mailto:ietf@augustcellars.com]
Sent: = Saturday, December 17, 2011 11:01 PM
To: Tschofenig, Hannes = (NSN - FI/Espoo); abfab@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [abfab] Issue 12 = - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms

 

Given that to date we have very explicitly designed things to work w/ = RADIUS and  have not taken on the work for Diameter, but that we = all say that it should work just fine w/ Diameter.   I think = that making a statement the first time we use RADIUS that it does not = preclude the use of Diameter and then always using RADIUS is = fine.

 

From:= = abfab-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:abfab-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
Sent: Saturday, = December 17, 2011 7:21 AM
To: = abfab@ietf.org
Subject: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs = DIAMETER terms

 

Hi Jim, =

thank you for your detailed = review.

In issue 12 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/w= g/abfab/trac/ticket/12 you = wrote:

“

We have defined a IdP as containing a = radius server.

Issue #1 is = should radius always be capitalized?

Issue #2 At = this point - should we say that we use the term RADIUS as being either = RADIUS or DIAMETER?

“

Yes, RADIUS should be = capitalized. Diameter is not = capitalized.

Regarding item #2 we have = two options:

a)    &n= bsp; We = could instead of using the term = RADIUS use AAA to refer to both RADIUS and = Diameter.

b)    &n= bsp; We could, = as you indicate, state that we use = the term RADIUS = without any loss of generality.

I think the question = ultimately boils down to what our audience better = understands.

I don’t really know = but I prefer (a) since that’s what I have done in other = docs.

Ciao

Hannes

=
------_=_NextPart_001_01CCBE25.A8663F58-- From dromasca@avaya.com Tue Dec 20 10:15:11 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0012221F85EF; Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:15:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.307 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.307 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.292, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Yk1IYSzcZz-3; Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:15:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6305521F85A7; Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:15:10 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EAD7Q8E6HCzI1/2dsb2JhbABDrAKBBYF0AQEDEh4KPxIBFRUGDAwHVwEEARoaozWbV4spYwSaboxC X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,383,1320642000"; d="scan'208";a="320571369" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 20 Dec 2011 13:15:09 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.13]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 20 Dec 2011 13:02:36 -0500 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:15:01 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: aaa-implementers mail list Thread-Index: Acy/Q0ot2wRKzJnPRsObIIaEsoL0Nw== From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , Cc: Ronald Bonica Subject: [AAA-DOCTORS] aaa-implementers mail list X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:15:11 -0000 Hi, The aaa-implementers list had no traffic for the last couple of years. Ron and me plan to take it down soon. Anybody objects?=20 Thanks and Regards, Dan