Re: RADIUS STOP packet. (Was Re: (ASCEND) Radius: stop use...

[Thomas C Kinnen <tkinnen@livingston.com>]

Mitchell Arnone wrote:
 
> I will never try to act as if I know all there is to know about setting
> standards but in my experience, if every NAS vendor limits their use of
> technology to only that which is written to a draft standard, we would be
> complaining to these same vendors complaining why they cannot meet our
> needs in areas not covered in these standards.  I am happy that Ascend
> provides additional attributes and I purchased a RADIUS product that
> supports the attributes I need to monitor.

The issue that MZ was talking about is that they used attribute numbers out
side  the numbers reserved for experimental use.  Also that VSA support was
added to allow them to add as many as they wanted without conflicting with
existing attribute numbers however this was not implemented until recently.
Finally that the MAXs did not implement things per the RFE that have been in
there for a while.  Access-Challenge for example.  The response to a
challenge is supposed to be in the Password AVP but instead ascend sends it
in the Ascend-Third-Prompt attribute.  NOw the RFC attributes numbers are up
to the Ascend attribute numbers and the issue becomes that if more
attributes are added to the RFC then they will conflict with what the Ascend
attribute numbers are.  This becomes a big issue when people run mixed shops
with multiple vendors NASs.  

-- 
Thomas C Kinnen - <tkinnen@ra.lucent.com> <tkinnen@sobhrach.com>
[RADIUS Test Engineer] - LUCENT Technologies RABU
"All of the opinions stated above are my own and not my employer's,
unless they were given to me by my employer"
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe:	send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd:	<http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>