Subject: RE: [Isms] draft of ISMS charter

From: "Nelson, David" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 11:50:49 -0400

> The other thing to look at is the question where we do the RADIUS
> specific work - whether that actually falls within ISMS (which would
> be logical since ISMS and the RADIUS stuff must work together) or
> whether this actually falls within RADEXT where the RADIUS experts are
> hanging around which we need to review the document. I do not have a
> strong opinion here - perhaps something the IESG should give advise.

Speaking as an individual and co-author of a relevant I-D, I would like
to point out that we have a draft under consideration in RADEXT that
currently includes this functionality.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nelson-radius-management-autho
rization-02.txt

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

---

From: "David T. Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 10:25:53 -0700 (PDT)

HI,

Every time I read the below I-D, the term "framed management" just seems
inappropriate. I'm sorry that I can't offer a better term, but that
term makes it seem like an inappropriate mechanism is being used.

Also, when you work through the examples in section 9, I just don't
believe that the model maps well to SNMPv3 VACM.

Bottom line for me is that the I-D is a good start, it's not nearly
well enough developed to go forward.

> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nelson-radius-management-autho
Regards,
/david t. perkins