1 / 7

RADEXT Issues and Fixes

This draft outlines issues, errors, and clarifications related to existing RADIUS RFCs. It provides a repository of issues and suggests fixes for protocol and documentation inconsistencies. The document is intended to be an Informational RFC and does not introduce new features. Issues covered include EAP errata, protocol clarifications, and best practices for RADIUS implementations. The draft encourages discussion on the WG mailing list and invites authors, contributors, and reviewers to participate in addressing the identified problems.

kwaite
Download Presentation

RADEXT Issues and Fixes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. RADEXT Issues and Fixes David B. Nelson RADEXT WG IETF 62 Minneapolis, MN

  2. The Issues and Fixes Draft • In the WG charter as a work item • Intended to be an Informational RFC • Covers problems, issues and points of confusion in existing RADIUS RFCs • Protocol issues or documentation issues • Not to be used to introduce new features, functionality or usages

  3. Repository of Issues • The current issues list is maintained at http://www.drizzle.com/~aboba/RADEXT/ • Add new issues using the issue template (at the sane location) and e-mail to the WG mailing list

  4. Summary of Issues • Issue 242 (EAP) Errata in RFC 3579. Clarify use of State attribute to support EAP. • Issue 55 Errata in RFC 3576. Allow Message-Authenticator in CoA messages. • Issue 60 Errata in RFC 2869. Updates RFC 2866 with respect to Interim-Update value of Acct-Status-Type. • Issue 61 Clarification of RFC 2865. Describe what to do with multiple instances of the Filter-ID attribute.

  5. Summary of Issues • Issue 62 Clarification of RFC 2865. The Service-Type attribute has implicit Mandatory status. • Issue 63 Clarification to RFC 3579. Practices for extending the Request-ID beyond 8 octets. • Issue 67 Clarification to RFC 2865 and RFC 3580. What types of traffic count toward maintaining the session’s Idle-Timeout value?

  6. Summary of Issues • Issue 68 Clarification to RFC 2865 (and others). How is RADIUS used to authorize provisioning of services beyond layer 2 or layer 3 network access? • Issue 69 Clarification of RFC 3576. Use of the Authorize-Only Service-Type within CoA messages. • Issue (tba) Clarification of RFC 2869. Appropriate use of the Access-Reject message, as opposed to the Access-Challenge message.

  7. Next Steps • Stimulate a fuller discussion of these issues on the WG mailing list • One e-mail thread per issue • Start the RADEXT Issues and Fixes I-D • Dave Nelson volunteers to act as document Editor • Need Authors, Contributors and Reviewers to step forward

More Related