Hi all, It looks like RADIUS RFC 2865, Section "5. Attributes" is ambiguous when it talks about the attribute value size:
First it says: "The Value field is zero or more octets", then it provides 5 possible value data types none of which allows a zero length value. Section "5.26. Vendor-Specific" also says about the value of a vendor-specific attribute "The String field is one or more octets". Thus the RFC allows empty values for attributes in general but prohibits for any declared types of the attributes. Regards, Oleg On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 12:08 PM Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear) <rfc-...@rfc-editor.org> wrote: > Dear EMU working group, > > Alan Dekok has reported two errata[1,2] against RFC 3579. RFC 3579 is > classed an independent submission, and thus falls under the purview of > the Independent Submissions Editor (ISE). The ISE is inclined to verify > both errata, and will do so in the next two months unless this group > advises otherwise. > > Eliot Lear (ISE) > > [1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6154 > [2] https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6259 > > _______________________________________________ > Emu mailing list > Emu@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu >
_______________________________________________ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
