Subject: [AAA-WG]: [issue] Make AVP Header consistent with Message Header

From: Paul Funk <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 21:55:51 -0400

Submitter name: Paul Funk 
Submitter email address: [email-masked] 
Date first submitted: May, 20001 
Reference:
Document: Base 
Comment Type: Technical 
Priority: 2 
Section: 4.1
Rationale/Explanation of issue: 
As long as we have 24 bit message length, how about 24 bit AVP length, 
with similar positioning of length in low order bits?

Requested change:
 
       0                   1                   2                   3
       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                           AVP Code                            |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |V|M|P| Reserved|                 AVP Length                    |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                        Vendor-ID (opt)                        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    Data ...
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Paul

Paul Funk
Funk Software, Inc.
617 497-6339
[email-masked]

---

From: Bernard Aboba <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 23:11:59 -0700 (PDT)

The 32-bit length field always did seem somewhat excessive. Thanks for
raising this issue. 

BTW, did you see Christian Huitemas suggestions somewhat along the same
lines?

---

From: David Frascone <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 15:00:41 -0500

Works for me.