Bernard Aboba wrote: > [BA] Given that the spec would create an incompatible variant of RADIUS, > I'd say that the situation is pretty serious, and that a document clarifying > the encoding of the NAI within RADIUS is critical.
OK. Can we get support for this position on the various mailing lists? I suspect the abfab people want to work within the existing RADIUS framework. The main difficulty is that the only NAI specification is 4282. If abfab has a normative dependency on an NAI spec, then publishing 4282bis quickly is a good idea. The draft describes existing practices, and has no new recommendations in it. So it *should* be non-controversial. Alan DeKok. _______________________________________________ abfab mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab
