RE: : Change to "Reply-Message AVP" usage in Diameter EAP

>It looks like we'll have a bad situation in any case, no 
>matter what we decide to do in this AUTH48. I'm inclined to 
>believe Pasi and Yoshi in that some kind of new NAS 
>functionality makes messages like this possible in the future, 
>and that the AAA servers are smart enough to decide what to do 
>based on the context.
>
>However, if we allow messages in Diameter EAP, this will 
>immediately create a problem for Diameter - Radius 
>translation, and will also create a need for updating RFC 
>3579. In the meantime some NASes will be throwing away the 
>message that the AAA server wanted to display.
>If on the other hand we keep the RFC 3579 approach in Diameter 
>EAP, then we are not providing this potentially useful 
>function. More importantly, we are mandating that NASes ignore 
>the AVP, which makes introducing the feature later hard.
>
>Perhaps one way to look at this would be to align RADIUS and 
>Diameter EAP according to the scheme in RFC 3579 now, and 
>later develop a new mini RFC that describes how Reply-Message 
>is to be used (for both RADIUS&Diameter).  Or the mini RFC 
>could be a part of Avi's PANA AAA document.

A mini-RFC could be a good way forwardy, it could update the
existing RFCs & that might be a cleaner way forward.

John