>
> What's the serious paranoia about vendor-specific extensions? As long as
>they are not required, i.e. you can still operate the portmaster at a
>competetive functionality even with a strict IETF RADIUS daemon, they're fine
>in my book.
There is nothing wrong with vendor-specific extensions per se. Just that
Livingston by policy chose not to do it. And considering that you get
get RADIUS from many sources, you don't have to stick to Livingston's.
You can even BUY Ascend's if you want to. Or Merit's, or you can
download ESVA. Or you can use an NT RADIUS. The choice is yours. There
is no reason to try to strongarm Livingston about it. If they choose
not to do it, market forces will determine whether it is the right thing.
IMHO, I think it IS the right thing. Let Ascend or whatever, do the
experimental thing. If they come up with a truely great idea, then the
RADIUS group will no doubt pick it up for the next RFC change.