Subject: Re: [AAA-WG]: Re: AAAH must be stateful

From: Joe Lau <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 16:11:36 -0700 (PDT)

Mark,
 
> I do have a question on the STR generation though: Assuming the AAAH
> included Auth-Session-State=NO_STATE_MAINTAINED in the HAR and a handoff
> results in the AMR being sent to a different AAAH than that which originally
> authorized the session, does this imply that the HA is not required to send
> an STR to the original AAAH?

Good question.  This needs to be clarified in the draft.

> > 	2) Whether AAAH must be stateful to meet the above requirement
> 
> If the requirement in (1) remains a MUST, I believe the AAAH MUST also be
> stateful. I don't think the Class attribute would help here unless it was
> somehow being passed down to the MN which echoed it back in subsequent MIP
> messages for the same session (regardless of FA).

I agree.

Regards,

Joe Lau

---

From: Pat Calhoun <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2001 14:52:36 -0700

Don't see why one would use NO_STATE_MAINTAINED for MIP application. It
was specifically designed to handle other apps that do not require any
state.

PatC