Re: [radext] draft-ietf-radext-nai-08 AD review

Benoit Claise wrote:
> 
> Alan,
> 
> Thanks for the version 9.
> The technical comment has been taken care of. Thanks.
> It's however a missed opportunity not to have taken into account the
> editorial comments below.

  I thought I had done that...

- "systems" qualified to non-AAA, AAA, and edge

- re-work the contradictory sentences

- etc.

> Regards, Benoit
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Here is my draft-ietf-radext-nai-08 AD review
>>
>> _Technical:_
>> -
>>    AAA systems MUST therefore be
>>    able to handle user identifiers which are not in the NAI format. 
>>    ...
>>
>>    Systems MAY accept user identifiers in forms other than the NAI.
>> These are contradictory.
>> I believe that:
>> - those two sentences (or paragraphs) should be next to each others.
>> - the second sentence should stress "Non AAA systems"
>>
>>    _Systems _MAY accept user identifiers in forms other than the NAI.
>>    This specification does not forbid that practice.  It only codifies
>>    the format and interpretation of the NAI.  We cannot expect to change
>>    existing protocols or practices.  We can, however, suggest that using
>>    a consistent form for a user identifier is of a benefit to the
>>    community.
>>
>>    Where protocols carry identifiers which are expected to be
>>    transported over an AAA protocol, it is RECOMMENDED that the
>>    identifiers be in NAI format.  Where the identifiers are not in the
>>    NAI format, it is up to the _AAA systems_ to discover this, and to
>>    process them.  This document does not suggest how that is done.
>>    However, existing practice indicates that it is possible.
>> Be consistent between systems, non-AAA systems, and AAA systems
>>
>> Editorial:
>>
>> -
>> when you produce a new draft version, don't forget
>> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/radext/trac/ticket/176
>>
>> -
>>   Considerable interest exists for a set of features that fit within
>>    the general category of inter-domain authentiction
>>
>> authentication
>>
>> - 
>>    Normalization Canonicalization
>>
>>       These terms are defined in [RFC6365] Section 4 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6365#section-4>.  We incorporate
>>       the definitions here by reference.
>> Isn't "Normalization or Canonicalization"
>>
>> - Like mentioned in the last bullet point below, all links should
>> point to the RFC4282 sections, not to draft-ietf-radext-nai-08 sections.
>>    *  The requirement in Section 2.1 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-radext-nai-08#section-2.1> that realms are ASCII conflicts
>>       with the Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) and RADIUS,
>>       which are both 8-bit clean, and which both recommend the use of
>>       UTF-8 for identitifiers.
>>
>>    * Section 2.4 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-radext-nai-08#section-2.4> required mappings that are language-specific,
>>       and which are nearly impossible for intermediate nodes to perform
>>       correctly without information about that language.
>>
>>    * Section 2.4 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-radext-nai-08#section-2.4> requires normalization of user names, which
>>       may conflict with local system or administrative requirements.
>>
>>    * The recommendations in Section 2.4 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-radext-nai-08#section-2.4> for treatment of
>>       bidirectional characters have proven to be unworkable.
>>
>>    * The prohibition against use of unassigned code points in
>>       Section 2.4 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-radext-nai-08#section-2.4> effectively prohibits support for new scripts.
>>
>>    * No Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting (AAA)
>>       client, proxy, or server has implemented any of the requirements
>>       in [RFC4282] Section 2.4 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4282#section-2.4>, among other sections.
>>
>>
>> -
>>
>>
>>     5 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-radext-nai-08#section-5>.
>>     Administration of Names
>>
>>
>>     In order to avoid creating any new administrative procedures,
>>
>>
>>    administration of the NAI realm namespace piggybacks on the
>>    administration of the DNS namespace.
>>
>> There is a tag issue above. The section tag contains the first line of section 5.
>>
>> Regards, Benoit
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> radext mailing list
>> radext@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext
> 