Subject: Re: [radext] #176 (nai): draft-ietf-radext-nai-05: is the term *Network Access* Identifier still appropriate?

From: "radext issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:39:38 -0000

#176: draft-ietf-radext-nai-05: is the term *Network Access* Identifier still
appropriate?

Comment (by [email-masked]):

 I think this requires larger discussion in the WG

-- 
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
 Reporter:                           |       Owner:  draft-ietf-radext-
  [email-masked]           |  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect                   |      Status:  new
 Priority:  major                    |   Milestone:
Component:  nai                      |     Version:
 Severity:  Waiting for Shepherd     |  Resolution:
  Writeup                            |
 Keywords:                           |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/radext/trac/ticket/176#comment:1>
radext <http://tools.ietf.org/radext/>

---

From: Jouni Korhonen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:48:20 +0300

I do not have technical reasoning for my position here but.. Personally 
I would not start renaming NAI. Quite a few documents refer to RFC4282 
and implicitly to this document and it would be confusing to change the 
name this late. IMHO what matters here is the functionality & technical 
corrections the I-D provides. If we need to finetune Section 1.1. 
terminology, let's do it.

- Jouni