Subject: [AAA-WG]: Diameter NASreq draft 17

From: David Mitton <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 18:48:47 -0400

I've submitted a new version to ietf-drafts

A copy is availible at:

http://www.circularnetworks.com/draft-ietf-aaa-diameter-nasreq-17.txt

Changes are:

18-July-2004
Document Editor: David Mitton

---
Issue #	468

Summary Description: Missing "[Failed AVP]" in AAA ABNF

Document review found several inconsistencies in error reporting AVPs
in the message ABNFs and occurance tables.

a) Inserted in AAA, and ACA ABNF
              * [ Failed-AVP ]

b) Inserted missing  in ACA ABNF
			[Error-Message]

c) Removed redundant from RAA ABNF
			[Error-Message]
			[Error-Reporting-Host]

d) Inserted Error-Message and Failed-AVP in Accounting occurence tables.
Section 10.2.

e) Corrected occurance of Error-Reporting-Host in Non-Framed ACA table
from 0+ to 0-1

Question: Why is Failed-AVP 0+ in Request messages?
	(Table 10.1, page 75)
	Can a Failed AVP be forwarded in a non-Answer message?

-----

Issue # 466

Description: Missing QoSFilterRule AVP

Inserted proposed text as section 6.9  (old 6.9++)
Assigned AVP code 407

Section renumbering and reference fixups.

Added the new AVP to the ABNF for AAA, ACR
Added the new AVP to table of Section 6.
Added the new AVP to the AVP occurance tables in Section 10.

Changed occurance of NAS-Filter rule to 0+ in ACR

Added DIFFSERV, DIFFSERVAF, and DIFFSERVEF as Informative references

----

Issue #	464

Application-Id usage

Section 1.3, Advertising Application Support,  now says:

Diameter applications conforming to this specification MUST advertise
support by including the value of one (1) in the Auth-Application-Id of
Capabilities-Exchange-Request (CER), AA-Request (AAR) and AA-Answer
(AAA) messages.  All other messages are defined by [Base] and use the
Base application id value.

----

Updated dates,
Realigned tables, page breaks