Subject: [AAA-WG]: [issue] Extension Compliance wording confusion

From: Mark Eklund <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 18:56:00 -0400 (EDT)

Submitter name: Mark Eklund
Submitter email address: [email-masked]
Date first submitted: 18-May-2001
Reference: 
Document: Base
Comment type: E
Priority: 2
Section: 2.4
Rationale/Explanation of issue:

  The paragraph

    An implementation MAY support both a proprietary version of an
    extension by requesting an IANA extension identifier (see section
    16.3), while supporting the original extension. During the
    capabilities exchange, a Diameter node can determine whether to
    exchange messages using the proprietary or standard version of the
    extension by inspecting the extensions advertised by the peer.

  can be misinterpreted to say that there is a form of
  capability negotiation.  A slight wording change is requested.

Requested change:

  Add the text between the (*)'s

    An implementation MAY support both a proprietary version of an
    extension by requesting an IANA extension identifier (see section
    16.3), while supporting the original extension. During the
    capabilities exchange, (* the Diameter nodes advertises all supported
    extensions.  After capabilities exchange, the *) Diameter node can
    determine whether to exchange messages using the proprietary or
    standard version of the extension by inspecting the extensions
    (* that were *) advertised by the peer.

====================================================================

---

From: Mark Eklund <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 17:37:38 -0400 (EDT)

Resolution of issue:

It was agreed that this wording change was acceptable.

-mark