Re: (ASCEND) Ascend RADIUS - what now?

[Tim Basher <basher@ces.cwru.edu>]

> I'm just curious...
> 
> The IETF RADIUS WG RFCs and drafts have reached Attribute 86 - 
> (Acct-Tunnel-Packets-Lost).
> 
> The next number to be assigned is 87 - and Ascend has bogus attributes
> taking almost every number from 87-255.

As someone who has had to use some of those attributes I would not call
them bogus.  They are potentially conflicting with other attributes, but
they are basically just vendor specific attributes that were not using
the Vendor-Specific attribute for encoding.  Considering the fact that
the Vendor-Specific attribute encoding did not exist when Ascend started
adding vendor specific attributes, you cannot fault them for their
approach - only for the time it took them to switch to proper use.

> So, Ascend's private bogus playground is going to get paved over with
> official attributes before too long.  How does Ascend plan on dealing
> with this?

Ascend has already dealt with it.  Did you read the TAOS 7.0.0 documents?
TAOS 7.0.0 now supports the use of the Vendor-Specific attribute to encode
all the Ascend vendor specific attributes.  It is not enabled by default,
but you can turn it on with a configuration parameter.  Switch on the
option and there are no potential conflicts.

++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe:	send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd:	<http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>