: Contradiction in RFC 4006
"Glen Zorn (gwz)" <[email protected]> Wed, 14 Jun 2006 17:01:44 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.aaa |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <4C0FAAC489C8B74F96BEAD85EAEB2625022AF3DE@xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com> |
Section 5.6.3 says=20 "A Final-Unit-Indication AVP with the Final-Unit-Action RESTRICT_ACCESS [in the CCA message] indicates to the=20 device supporting this action that the user's access MUST be restricted according to the IP packet filters given in the Restriction-Filter-Rule AVP(s) or according to the IP packet filters identified by the Filter-Id AVP(s)." However, the next sentence says "The credit-control server SHOULD include either the Restriction-Filter- Rule AVP or the Filter-Id AVP in the Credit-Control-Answer message." So, what happens if the referenced AVPs are not included in the CCA? ~gwz Treat the Earth well.=20 It was not given to you by your parents. It was loaned to you by your children. -- Kenyan Proverb Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect. -- Chief Seattle