Subject: [AAA-WG]: Re: Self Describing record formats for multiple (non-network-access) usage types

From: "Bernard Aboba" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 12:57:06 -0800

>I have been looking at the AAA related documents for record formats and I
>have an idea to share about the formats.

Do you have an idea to share relating to defining a record format, or
relating to carriage of a record format?

>Is there a thought in the AAA WG of having self describing records in the
>overall AAA framework ?.

At one point, there was discussion of using DIAMETER for carriage of
record formats, rather than just AVPs. However, for the goals of the
AAA WG, this did not seem essential, and so the WG consensus has been
to remove support for the ADIF record format from the protocol.

>This would allow other known unknown and not invented usage records to be
>accomodated in the AAA framework.

There are many ways to transport record formats. To figure out which one
of them is useful, you need to have a requirements document laying out
what the transport has to do.

>This way, if the transport issues are resolved, new usage types would not
present a
>challenge to the record format. Also having a AAA framework that
accomodates
>other usage types (other than end user network access) would be beneficial.

Transport issues are in practice the crux of the problem. You have to think
about what kinds of security you need to provide, how reliable the transport
needs to be, etc. Once you've got that all figured out, then you have a way
of deciding if DIAMETER is right for you.

>I have some ideas on this thought process. If this thought is-being or
>has-been dicussed, then perhaps I missed it. Is there any place that I
>should be looking ? Any useful pointers ?

I'd suggest looking at the following documents:
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2924.txt
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2975.txt
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-aboba-roamops-adif-00.txt (just
submitted)