As a contributor, I want to provide my WGLC review for this document. Overall, I think it’s in good shape, and I would like to see this progressed. I do have a few specific comments.
In Section 4.1, Step 4 says that the NAS will notify the SDN Controller. This part feels a bit under-specified. The “how” may be out of scope, but I think it’s worth mentioning that or offering some examples of how the notification could work. In my reading, it’s not RADIUS itself that the NAS uses to notify the SDN controller, right? Maybe it’s just me, but in Section 7 when you say the User-Access-Group-ID must be at most 67 octets, it might be good to explain why here. The YANG definition specifies a string of 1..64 bytes (good), but that isn’t repeated here. Likewise, indicating the other three octets are for type, length, etc. help to crystallize why the 67 value is there. As chair, I haven’t seen any other replies on this, and I am considering extending the last call by a week. I’ve now asked for OPS and INT directorate reviews, too. Joe From: Joe Clarke (jclarke) <[email protected]> Date: Monday, September 15, 2025 at 09:15 To: opsawg <[email protected]> Subject: [OPSAWG]WG LC: A YANG Data Model and RADIUS Extension for Policy-based Network Access Control (draft-ietf-opsawg-ucl-acl) Hello, opsawg. With the IPR disclosure done (no known IPR has been disclosed) and a new -08 revision, we are ready to begin a two week WG LC for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-ucl-acl/. Please reply to the list with comments and support for this work being ready to move forward to the IESG for publication. The WG LC will run until September 29. Thanks. Joe and Benoît
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
