Some time ago, Randy Bush [mailto://randy(_at_)psg(_dot_)com] wrote:
The AAA WG has completed WG last call on the Diameter Base-10 and
Transport-07 documents. As a result of WG last call comments, no
changes were made to the Transport document, and 20 changes were
made to the Diameter Base document, with 5 comments rejected.
as ad, i will not be passing this to the iesg for review. there
is one comment that has not been addressed by -11, vendor-specific
commands. as i have repeatedly said, if i was to pass this to the
iesg, it is a sure show-stopper.
rather than saying it all over again, can folk please review the
mailing list archive on this.
The archives are available again, so I attempted to review them. However,
it appears that the archives are incomplete: I couldn't find a single
message in them on this topic from any IESG member.
essentially, the iesg has a hot-
button about mandatory vendor commands.
Given the above, I (and perhaps the rest of the WG) would _really_
appreciate it if you (or anyone else on the IESG) would take the time to
explain 1) where in the current document mandatory vendor commands are
specified and 2) how the mechanisms in the current protocol are
dangerous to
interoperability. It would be _extra_ wonderful if this explanation had
some technical qualities (as opposed to hot flashes) and evinced that the
explainer had actually read the document in question.
randy