Hi Jim,
I thought that the chairs will re-issue a call for the Diameter part and then make a decision. Am I wrong? Ciao Hannes From: ext Jim Schaad [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 11:01 PM To: Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo); [email protected] Subject: RE: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms Given that to date we have very explicitly designed things to work w/ RADIUS and have not taken on the work for Diameter, but that we all say that it should work just fine w/ Diameter. I think that making a statement the first time we use RADIUS that it does not preclude the use of Diameter and then always using RADIUS is fine. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 7:21 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [abfab] Issue 12 - AAA vs RADIUS vs DIAMETER terms Hi Jim, thank you for your detailed review. In issue 12 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/abfab/trac/ticket/12 <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/abfab/trac/ticket/12> you wrote: " We have defined a IdP as containing a radius server. Issue #1 <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/abfab/trac/ticket/1> is should radius always be capitalized? Issue #2 <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/abfab/trac/ticket/2> At this point - should we say that we use the term RADIUS as being either RADIUS or DIAMETER? " Yes, RADIUS should be capitalized. Diameter is not capitalized. Regarding item #2 we have two options: a) We could instead of using the term RADIUS use AAA to refer to both RADIUS and Diameter. b) We could, as you indicate, state that we use the term RADIUS without any loss of generality. I think the question ultimately boils down to what our audience better understands. I don't really know but I prefer (a) since that's what I have done in other docs. Ciao Hannes
_______________________________________________ abfab mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab
