Subject: [Geopriv] RE: draft-jones-radius-geopriv

From: Tschofenig Hannes <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:28:15 +0100

hi john, 

you are fully right. we have also identified this as an issue. i think we
should also think about size considerations in the geopriv working group. 

ciao
hannes

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Schnizlein [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 7:12 PM
> To: Tschofenig Hannes
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: draft-jones-radius-geopriv
> 
> 
> Including the GeoPriv WG..
> 
> One concern, if this location configuration information (LCI) 
> is to be carried over RADIUS, is that the example in section 6 
> seems to be 993 characters long. This one attribute seems to be 
> taking a large share of the maximum RADIUS packet size of 4096.
> [RFC 2865, p 15] Is there enough room for everything else that
> would be expected with this attribute?
> 
> John
> 
> At 12:05 PM 2/10/2004, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
> 
> >you can find the geogriv/radius draft at: 
> >http://www.tschofenig.priv.at/drafts/draft-jones-radius-geopriv-00.html
> >http://www.tschofenig.priv.at/drafts/draft-jones-radius-geopriv-00.txt
> >
> >the draft tries awareness for privacy and reuses results of 
> the geopriv
> >working group. 
> 

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