IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Emu] Short review of draft-friel-tls-eap-dpp-01

Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com> Wed, 28 July 2021 19:34 UTC

Return-Path: <aland@deployingradius.com>
X-Original-To: emu@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: emu@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA7A33A1D1F for <emu@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 12:34:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b87wdFkAN3z7 for <emu@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 12:34:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.networkradius.com (mail.networkradius.com [62.210.147.122]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3557F3A1D1D for <emu@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 12:34:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.46.129] (24-52-251-6.cable.teksavvy.com [24.52.251.6]) by mail.networkradius.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F2131DD; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 19:34:50 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: NetworkRADIUS; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=deployingradius.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\))
From: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
In-Reply-To: <90b5512e-4cd0-0835-43ec-8b76cce4a51f@lounge.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 15:34:48 -0400
Cc: emu@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F49ED4F9-B6B8-42EB-9140-5722C71E147F@deployingradius.com>
References: <1FE63FE4-4B23-4E0C-AF06-1372D6DA8869@deployingradius.com> <MW3PR11MB47467A3A2E47F9723E2CFEC8DBE99@MW3PR11MB4746.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <E02A3731-EBB8-40B6-84DB-A99CA473DFAA@deployingradius.com> <EC71CCD5-7235-48C3-AC21-FFF4BE0C028E@deployingradius.com> <90b5512e-4cd0-0835-43ec-8b76cce4a51f@lounge.org>
To: Dan Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emu/VSjeQJYk8kWuuQHn5zUYq843KcM>
Subject: Re: [Emu] Short review of draft-friel-tls-eap-dpp-01
X-BeenThere: emu@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "EAP Methods Update \(EMU\)" <emu.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/emu>, <mailto:emu-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/emu/>
List-Post: <mailto:emu@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emu-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu>, <mailto:emu-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 19:34:57 -0000

On Jul 28, 2021, at 12:26 PM, Dan Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org> wrote:
>   Assuming everything can be assigned a username and a password is what is wrong.

  Yes.  That was intended to be just an example, though.

> If you're concerned about *standard* EAP methods being used in *standard* ways
> then think about what we're proposing:
> 
>   1. No change to RFC 7170
>   2. No change to RFC 8773
>   3. No change to RFC 7250
>   4. a new name assignment from a name registry created by an I-D (soon to be RFC)

  That's good.

  One of the goals of my draft was minimal changes to existing systems.  For example, the TEAP RFC is ~7 years old, and based on 3-4 years of work before that.  Yet it was only recently that people started implementing it, and discovered serious issues.

> So what we're proposing is using an EAP method in a way in it was defined and using
> TLS to authenticate it using tools which were defined to authenticate TLS. We're just
> proposing to use those tools in a new way.

  Yup.

  Alan DeKok.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email