Thanks Mohamed, Cheers Tim On Wed, 13 Feb 2019, 08:47 <[email protected] wrote:
> Hi Yu, > > > > Great! > > > > Uploaded -20 which fixes the reference issue you pointed out + includes a > mention that configuration consistency check is also the responsibility of > the AAA server. > > > > Cheers, > > Med > > > > *De :* Yu Tianpeng [mailto:[email protected]] > *Envoyé :* mardi 12 février 2019 15:10 > *À :* BOUCADAIR Mohamed TGI/OLN > *Cc :* [email protected] > *Objet :* Re: [Softwires] I-D Action: > draft-ietf-softwire-map-radius-19.txt > > > > Thanks > > Cheers. > > > > On Tue, 12 Feb 2019, 14:07 <[email protected] wrote: > > Hi Yu, > > > > The answer to your question is: Yes. > > > > Cheers, > > Med > > > > *De :* Yu Tianpeng [mailto:[email protected]] > *Envoyé :* mardi 12 février 2019 14:52 > *À :* BOUCADAIR Mohamed TGI/OLN > *Cc :* [email protected] > *Objet :* Re: [Softwires] I-D Action: > draft-ietf-softwire-map-radius-19.txt > > > > Thanks a lot Mohamed. > > It answers my questions. > > Inline below. > > Regards, > > Tim > > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019, 12:42 <[email protected] wrote: > > Hi Yu, > > > > Please see inline. > > > > Cheers, > > Med > > > > *De :* Softwires [mailto:[email protected]] *De la part de* Yu > Tianpeng > *Envoyé :* lundi 11 février 2019 12:27 > *À :* [email protected] > *Objet :* Re: [Softwires] I-D Action: > draft-ietf-softwire-map-radius-19.txt > > > > Dear authors, > > Thanks for the new version. > > I had a quick read on latest version. I find some nits and also some > questions along the way as we meet a scenario when deploying MAP that need > s46 radius attributes. > > > > Nits: > > Section 7.1 should be referring section 3.x not 4.x > > [Med] Thank you for catching the bug in Section 7.1. > > > > Question: > > 1. How is the status of this document? This draft has last called long > time ago, but still not standard yet. What is the reason? Any plans to move > further? As I mentioned we meet requirement when deploying map, we may need > to make a decision if we follow this draft or define a vendor specific one. > > > > [Med] The document passed the WGLC + addressed the reviews from radext wg.. > We do think that the document is ready to be sent to the IESG. > > [Tim] glad to know. Thanks > > 2. This draft seems haven't consider conflicts between subscribers. E.g. > EA length conflict between subscribers with in one MAP domain? And EA > length from radius conflict with BNG within same MAP domain? > > As this draft enables the capability to maintain MAP rule logic in radius, > conflict mechanisn should be investigated in my POV. > > > > [Med] Which conflict mechanism do you have in mind? > > > > I’m afraid this is deployment and implementation-specific. FWIW, the draft > includes the following to warrant that some consistency checks is needed: > > > > In some deployments, the DHCP server may use the Accounting-Request > > to report to a AAA server the softwire configuration returned to a > > requesting host. It is the responsibility of the DHCP server to > > ensure the consistency of the configuration provided to requesting > > hosts. > > [Tim] yes, it solves one of the scenario I mentioned. > > I believe if dhcp server use access request to get s46 info from AAA, then > AAA server is response to enrue the consistency I suppose. Am I right? > > > > Appreciate your feedback. > > Thanks in advance > > Tim > > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019, 08:26 <[email protected] wrote: > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Softwires WG of the IETF. > > Title : RADIUS Attributes for Address plus Port (A+P) > based Softwire Mechanisms > Authors : Sheng Jiang > Yu Fu > Bing Liu > Peter Deacon > Chongfeng Xie > Tianxiang Li > Mohamed Boucadair > Filename : draft-ietf-softwire-map-radius-19.txt > Pages : 39 > Date : 2019-02-11 > > Abstract: > IPv4-over-IPv6 transition mechanisms provide IPv4 connectivity > services over IPv6 native networks during the IPv4/IPv6 co-existence > period. DHCPv6 options have been defined for configuring clients for > Lightweight 4over6, Mapping of Address and Port with Encapsulation, > and Mapping of Address and Port using Translation unicast softwire > mechanisms, and also multicast softwires. However, in many networks, > configuration information is stored in an Authentication, > Authorization, and Accounting server which utilizes the RADIUS > protocol to provide centralized management for users. When a new > transition mechanism is developed, new RADIUS attributes need to be > defined correspondingly. > > This document defines new RADIUS attributes to carry Address plus > Port based softwire configuration parameters from an Authentication, > Authorization, and Accounting server to a Broadband Network Gateway. > Both unicast and multicast attributes are covered. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-softwire-map-radius/ > > There are also htmlized versions available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-map-radius-19 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-softwire-map-radius-19 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-softwire-map-radius-19 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires > >
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
