Question on new dictionaries & values

[Mathieu Simon (Lists)]

Hi Arran and Alan

Am 10.02.2014 15:03, schrieb Alan DeKok:
> Mathieu Simon (Lists) wrote:
>> What is the current consenscus on tha Attribute naming. I've learned
>> that underline usage isn't appreciated even though some vendors use it.
> 
>   Personally, I hate it.  It's annoying, and doesn't follow the 20 year
> practice of RADIUS.

Yup, that's what I learned from your reaction on a previous pull request ;-)

> 
>> VENDOR foovendor <id>
>>
>> a) ATTRIBUTE foovendor-name-by-vendor-doc...
>> b) ATTRIBUTE name-by-vendor-doc...
>>
>> I've seen both in usage but mostly consistently throughout a dictionary
>> itself (some vendors indicate variant a, some don't but it doesn't
>> always match with FR's dicts).
> 
>   We try to balance the approaches of "use sane names" and "use vendor
> names".  It's not always perfect.

I followed yours and Arran's recommendation, thanks for both
clarifications. In the end there is always a human factor of "YMMV" and
need to find an agreement :-)

> 
>   The *official* recommendation for naming schemes is given here:
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc6929#section-2.7.1
> 
>   You'll note I'm the author. :)

Yup, I now I read it and the wording "RECOMMENDED" and "SHOULD" are
likely following the reality where you recommend the vendors to use sane
namings but in reality they might just ignore the recommendation.
Allas, good luck to get that RFC into a standard!

-- Mat