Re: [Emu] Question of piggybacking in EAP

Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com> Mon, 27 September 2021 17:29 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 5DB033A0E0E for <emu@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 10:29:23 -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 88c6y_TTBPE5 for <emu@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 10:29:18 -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 2A4C03A0E0B for <Emu@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 10:29:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.20.33] (unknown [75.98.136.133]) by mail.networkradius.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D96F84F; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 17:29:14 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: NetworkRADIUS; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=deployingradius.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\))
From: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
In-Reply-To: <CY4PR06MB336784C5CB00416DA13B5D9A85A79@CY4PR06MB3367.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2021 13:29:13 -0400
Cc: "Emu@ietf.org" <Emu@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DC7A289D-4C24-47C0-98C2-937FA761FB44@deployingradius.com>
References: <CY4PR06MB336784C5CB00416DA13B5D9A85A79@CY4PR06MB3367.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
To: Yuan Tian <Y.Tian@cablelabs.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emu/qRpqesEKL-_TbTy8PoeP-Li-rYg>
Subject: Re: [Emu] Question of piggybacking in EAP
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: Mon, 27 Sep 2021 17:29:23 -0000

On Sep 27, 2021, at 1:18 PM, Yuan Tian <Y.Tian@cablelabs.com> wrote:
> And I checked AVP lists, there is an “EAP” AVP available and but it seems to be designed for AAA and needs to be always used with RADIUS access-request/access-challenge (is that okay if I do not allow the server to forwards the message in Radius access-request?).

  RFC 5281 Section 10 says that the inner data is in Diameter format, and uses the RADIUS / Diameter attribute space.  So just use EAP-Message.

>    Upon receipt of the tunneled EAP-Response/Identity, the TTLS server
>    forwards it to the AAA/H in a RADIUS Access-Request.
>  
> So my question is, besides EAP-TTLS, is there an EAP protocol that is widely supported and can be used for piggybacking a customized protocol?
> Thanks,.

  TTLS seems like the best approach.  Inside of that you can use EAP-Message, and a vendor-specific EAP type.

  Alan DeKok.