IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] [radext] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-radius-opt-10

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Fri, 05 April 2013 11:43 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1420A21F9767; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 04:43:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xbuGBSXBxtIS; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 04:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og110.obsmtp.com (exprod7og110.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74A9521F9765; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 04:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob110.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUV64w9Gzo03tjCPak2KTXLV5be3qJsLf@postini.com; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 04:43:00 PDT
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8D4A108177; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 04:42:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC87919005D; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 04:42:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.132]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 04:42:59 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] [radext] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-radius-opt-10
Thread-Index: AQHOMc3xheg1Y2HRokOypXMokVkn6ZjH9y6A
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 11:42:58 +0000
Message-ID: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775132B92@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
References: <B51C71CC-654D-43F3-A50A-321C171CD562@gmail.com> <515D7B4D.7090201@deployingradius.com> <515db052.24fa440a.4c16.ffff93c2@mx.google.com> <515DBD38.2020607@deployingradius.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775131DB4@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <515DE629.6070706@deployingradius.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775132294@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <515DE957.1060202@deployingradius.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775132374@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <9992DCA7-FFB3-4328-A8FC-266109BDD059@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <9992DCA7-FFB3-4328-A8FC-266109BDD059@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <505BF77EABF0DA4E91BAFC9B71A9B946@nominum.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "<radext@ietf.org>" <radext@ietf.org>, dhcwg <dhcwg@ietf.org>, Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] [radext] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-radius-opt-10
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 11:43:01 -0000

On Apr 5, 2013, at 3:19 AM, Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:
>   The option-data of OPTION_RADIUS is a list of one or more RADIUS
>   attributes received in the Access-Accept message from the RADIUS
>   server. The OPTION_RADIUS can only contain RADIUS attributes
>   listed in the IANA Registry of 'RADIUS attributes permitted in
>   DHCPv6 RADIUS option'.

So you took out the normative language, right?   Was that intentional?

> The next question I have is what happens when a relay includes an attribute
> that the server does not understand or is not listed in the registry? There
> is no versioning thus it is possible that relay and server have a different
> understanding what the IANA registry is. Now the text in Section 6 only
> addresses the case where the server does not understand the DHCP option.

Good question.   I think the right answer is that that RADIUS attribute is silently ignored, because, as you say, the server might not be up to date.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email