Subject: RE: criteria for new app ID [was: Re: [Dime] Mobile IPv6 Bootstrapping- "Application ID"vs."NAS-Port-Type AVP/Service-Type": Summary]

From: "Glen Zorn \(gwz\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 17:46:54 -0700

Anders Kristensen <mailto:[email-masked]> supposedly scribbled:

...

> 
> Well, suppose Gq's AAR did include that AVP. The question is whether
> we'd want Gq to define its own app ID in that case. I think we would
> because it seems semantically quite different from NASREQ.  
> 

It might be nice (from a human POV), but I don't think that we could require it.

Hope this helps,

~gwz

Why is it that most of the world's problems can't be solved by simply
  listening to John Coltrane? -- Henry Gabriel

_______________________________________________
DiME mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime