[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] [OPS-DIR] FW: Recharter: ISMS
Agreed. I realized after the fact that ISMS was not being CC'd.
dbh
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca at avaya.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 4:24 AM
> To: Juergen Schoenwaelder; Dave Nelson
> Cc: David B Harrington; ops-dir at ietf.org;
> aaa-doctors at ietf.org; mib-doctors at ietf.org; Pasi Eronen
> Subject: RE: [OPS-DIR] [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: Recharter: ISMS
>
> Unless there are special reasons to keep some of the interactions
> confidential I suggest to move the discussion to the isms mail list.
>
> Dan
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder
> > [mailto:j.schoenwaelder at jacobs-university.de]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 9:44 AM
> > To: Dave Nelson
> > Cc: 'David B Harrington'; Romascanu, Dan (Dan);
> > ops-dir at ietf.org; aaa-doctors at ietf.org; mib-doctors at ietf.org;
> > 'Pasi Eronen'
> > Subject: Re: [OPS-DIR] [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: Recharter: ISMS
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 05:23:18AM +0200, Dave Nelson wrote:
> >
> > > Having an AAA Subsystem might be a good thing. My question
> > is whether
> > > it is a necessary thing, and whether it would be worth the
> > extra time and effort.
> >
> > RFC 3411 defines the Access Control Subsystem, see sections
> > 3.1.2 and 4.3. David is perhaps right that the wording of the
> > charter text is not 100% RFC 3411 conform but since I believe
> > it is good enough in documenting what the WG wants to achieve.
> >
> > I personally would have loved to have an initial ID for the
> > RADIUS ACM integration work available to support the
> > recharerting discussion; this is where the wording really
> > matters. But it seems we won't get such an initial document...
> >
> > /js
> >
> > --
> > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen,
Germany
> > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> >
>