Subject: (radius) moving to ds without utf8 interoperability

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 10:49:34 -0800

as no one has responded to the request for an interoperability report for
utf8 encodings, we need to consider how to move forward should none be
forthcoming.

from rfc2026

4.1.2  Draft Standard

   ...

   The requirement for at least two independent and interoperable
   implementations applies to all of the options and features of the
   specification.  In cases in which one or more options or features
   have not been demonstrated in at least two interoperable
   implementations, the specification may advance to the Draft Standard
   level only if those options or features are removed.

randy
-
To unsubscribe, email [email-masked]' with
'unsubscribe ietf-radius' in the body of the message.

---

From: Barry L James <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 11:39:41 -0700 (MST)

Hi all,

	I have just a couple of questions that I'm unclear on and was
wondering if anyone might provide some insight.

1.  What are "undistinguished octets" exactly?  Does this mean there
should not be any discrete boundaries between octets and that the server
shouldn't assume to "cast" them into any specific data type?

2.  Why is the minimum length for a CHAP-Challenge 7?  With RFC defaults,
it would be three (1+1+1 since a STRING value cannot be NULL).  Is there
some CHAP requirement of a minimum of a 5 byte challenge?

3.  How does everyone feel about the attribute name guideline?  It seems
desirable to have all implementations use the same printable text names
for attributes but real-world evaluation shows this is not the case (ie
User-Service vs Service-Type for example).  The RFC doesn't (or I couldn't
find) speak about the desire to have congruency in printable text names.
Even though the text name won't affect the operation of the protocol, it
does shorten negotiation time when coming to common terms with different
implementations that might use different attribute names in dictionaries.
Is there an official RADIUS WG stand on this?

Thanks in advance for any comments.

Regards,
Barry

Barry L James            | Never doubt that a small group of
IP SWAT                  | thoughtful, committed citizens can
Level 3 Communications   | change the world.  Indeed, it's 
http://www.level3.com    | the only thing that ever has.
Member IEEE, AAAI        | #include <std_disclaimer>

-