[Geopriv] Re: draft-jones-radius-geopriv

From: Bernard Aboba ^lt;aboba@internaut.com>
Date: Tue Feb 10 2004 - 14:06:13 EST

> One concern, if this location configuration information (LCI)
> is to be carried over RADIUS, is that the example in section 6
> seems to be 993 characters long. This one attribute seems to be
> taking a large share of the maximum RADIUS packet size of 4096.
> [RFC 2865, p 15] Is there enough room for everything else that
> would be expected with this attribute?

I'm curious as to the contrast in approach taken by this draft versus the
DHCP option. Given the recent activity on encapsulation of RADIUS
attributes in DHCP, isn't it important for the DHCP option and the RADIUS
attribute to take similar approaches?

For example, if the goal is to make both the client and RADIUS server
aware of their location, then the NAS might pass a location attribute to
the RADIUS server, as well as passing this to the DHCP server in a relay
option. Encoding the information two very different ways seems like it
results in unnecessary overhead.

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
Received on Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:06:13 -0800 (PST)

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Feb 10 2004 - 14:26:01 EST