Re: [radext] Implementation inventions

[Alexander Clouter <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, 24 Aug 2023, at 03:28, Michael Sym wrote:
> Can we add “reliably associating accounting to a valid auth” to the list?
>  
> I see there’s an item about keeping User-Name consistent (which is definitely important!), but we also need other solid ways to tie auth to acct.  I think this is vital for broader adoption of paid Wi-Fi roaming.

CUI I think gets you there.

> I think clearer guidelines on Acct-Session-Id and Acct-Multi-Session-Id (and their inclusion in auth requests) could address this.

Maybe some wording around suggested uses of Acct-Session-Id (MAY in Access-Request) and Class (SHOULD in Access-Accept) would be helpful.

Would it be out of place to describe strategies here for implementors[1] on how to deal with awful vendor kit:

 1. try Acct-Session-Id
 2. sob a little and try Class
 3. get stiff drink and reconcile sliding window and MAC/CUI/...
 4. get whole bottle of stiff liquor and reconcile sliding window and MAC/username/...
 5. ...
 N. flip table

The problems of each strategy would be needed too with the vain hope that we can push the crap back uphill where it came from....we can hope.

Cheers

[1] Hat tip on the friendly advice and "this seems to work in the field" to RFC5080 section 2.1.2 (Request-ID Supplementation) that details "here is how to track in flight EAP sessions".