Subject: [AAA-WG]: [issue] User-Name in Answer messages

From: "Bob Kopacz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 11:29:56 -0500

Issue Number: To be assigned
Description of issue: Inconsistent rules about presence of User-Name
                      in Answer messages.
Submitter name: Bob Kopacz
Date first submitted: 01-10-2002.
Document: base, mobile-ip, nasreq
Comment type: T
Priority: 1
Section: Occurrence rules tables, and Message ABNFs.

Rationale/Explanation of issues:

The rules for the inclusion of the User-Name AVP in Answer
messages are inconsistent.  In draft-08:

The User-Name AVP MUST be echoed back (1 occurrence required) 
in these Answer messages:

    Re-Auth-Answer              (base protocol)
    Abort-Session-Answer        (base protocol)
    Session-Terminate-Answer    (base protocol)
    Accounting-Answer           (base protocol)

The User-Name AVP MAY be echoed back (0-1 occurrence)
in these Answer messages:

    AA-Answer                   (nasreq)
    Diameter-EAP-Answer	        (nasreq)

The User-Name AVP MUST NOT be echoed back (0 occurrences required) 
in these Answer messages (which caused conflicts at the recent 
bakeoff):

    AA-Mobile-Node-Answer       (mobile ip)
    Home-Agent-MIP-Answer       (mobile ip)

Requested change:

Since it is natural and harmless for an implementation to echo back
the User-Name, allow but do not require the User-Name AVP to appear in
Answer messages, if present in the Request.

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 12:13:26 +0200

>Answer messages, if present in the Request.

I agree with this issue.

Maybe we could give less room for interpretation in the
text though. I propose "MUST echo back User-Name AVP if present
in the Request".

Jari

---

From: "Bob Kopacz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 08:21:03 -0500

Hi,

> text though. I propose "MUST echo back User-Name AVP if present

Sure, this is fine.  I'm mainly after consistency.
 
> Jari

Bob K.