Re: (ASCEND) Radius (fwd)

To: Michiel Boland <boland@diva.nl>
Subject: Re: (ASCEND) Radius (fwd)
From: "Kevin A. Smith" <kevin@ascend.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 09:14:06 -0700
Cc: ascend-users@bungi.com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.980701093615.20422A-100000@ns.diva.nl>
References: <03b101bda49a$15e6ad80$073c8ece@tim.igateway.net>
Sender: owner-ascend-users@max.bungi.com

At 09:39 AM 7/1/98 +0200, Michiel Boland wrote:
>My view is that Ascend have created their own Y2K-like problem
>with this and they will be in *terrible* trouble if some of their
>bogus attribute numbers are re-used in a future RFC.

It is true that we should start migrating to RFC official attributes
and VSAs. The fact that we used attribute numbers that were reserved
is a legacy of the fact that pre-RFC (a long time before the RFC was
even in draft form) there were no such things as VSAs. Since we
needed a way to configure those attributes, at the time this was the
best (only?) way to do it. We have started to reduce the dependency
on the non-RFC attributes - for example with the support of Filter-ID,
and will eventually have the option to turn off completely the
Ascend extensions.

AAC itself has to support these attributes in the meantime (and 
probably will continue to do so) while still supporting all of the
RFC attributes and protocols.

Kevin Smith			Ascend Communications...
Customer Satisfaction	...where Network Solutions never end.

++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe:	send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd:	<http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>

References:

Re: (ASCEND) Radius (fwd)

From: "Tim Jung" <tjung@igateway.net>

Re: (ASCEND) Radius (fwd)

From: Michiel Boland <boland@diva.nl>

Prev by Date: Re: (ASCEND) Erase P50?
Next by Date: Re: (ASCEND) Radius-980618 release
Prev by thread: Re: (ASCEND) Radius (fwd)
Next by thread: Re: (ASCEND) Radius (fwd)
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread