Re: [radext] Adoption call for draft-perez-radext-radius-fragmentation-06

Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Mon, 07 October 2013 05:45 UTC

Return-Path: <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: radext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: radext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECDFD21E814B for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 22:45:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 x4zHvysbFMYM for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 22:45:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-la0-x22b.google.com (mail-la0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FCA721E8160 for <radext@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 22:45:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-la0-f43.google.com with SMTP id ep20so5226245lab.30 for <radext@ietf.org>; Sun, 06 Oct 2013 22:45:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=390cpZBqv2O8aSBIRcH8SHubFFMlpnh4BAznaN4/EnY=; b=Mojbr7aw5VU2MFzLZ2dgk9iKtiBb1nEDCq/FL5qxGzt88RDhj6/eSI/l6J+T6Zfh1H IWdA9/azmBop34VCdF/cyIfYebY5BaiAHmVneNVFMZLPiI5kwF//cgYiC9paVdTUC09a yr4hUFXFQXw/jqvZke9VS2uYnOWCKNrz2FHb8uGs9KAHCgp5P3ae/7HvxlR138gbUlIT up9qJ1iSIrmjrZpVGHLUqb2ySowmijlD/hteO8n8Nz1MqV1XrryyKPOGP1FQ/E+HtRKY t3ub26VNsAlFdkLS0nHDhnAL7gp9ivJ0zYHRKnoNiZZu1HJ3xPzsanE+X37U7lOmYX/C WvHw==
X-Received: by 10.152.2.233 with SMTP id 9mr118671lax.38.1381124717394; Sun, 06 Oct 2013 22:45:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.250.211] ([194.100.71.98]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id zc3sm17797383lbb.2.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 06 Oct 2013 22:45:13 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
From: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <tslhae17c9l.fsf@mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 08:45:19 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <030EFC3D-A9C8-4B68-AD7F-F98414781B77@gmail.com>
References: <86D0772B-4561-46BD-950D-AF95BED87292@gmail.com> <B4870ECE-1D3F-45C6-A080-8936A8045B6E@gmail.com> <tslhae17c9l.fsf@mit.edu>
To: Sam Hartman <hartmans@painless-security.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Cc: Jouni Korhonen <jouni@gmail.com>, "draft-perez-radext-radius-fragmentation@tools.ietf.org" <draft-perez-radext-radius-fragmentation@tools.ietf.org>, radext-chairs@tools.ietf.org, "radext@ietf.org" <radext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [radext] Adoption call for draft-perez-radext-radius-fragmentation-06
X-BeenThere: radext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: RADIUS EXTensions working group discussion list <radext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/radext>, <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/radext>
List-Post: <mailto:radext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext>, <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 05:45:31 -0000

Sam,

Sorry for the delay. Inline..


On Sep 4, 2013, at 1:48 AM, Sam Hartman <hartmans@painless-security.com> wrote:

>>>>>> "Jouni" == Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>    Jouni> Folks,
> 
>    Jouni> We will take draft-perez-radext-radius-fragmentation-06 as
>    Jouni> the _basis_ for the WG solution
> 
> Hi.
> I'd be happy if you reword that sentence as "_a_ _basis_ for _a_ WG
> solution."

Pardon my non-native English.. 'a' is fine.

> 
> I think there was significant support for the idea that this draft alone
> is insufficient and that we want to revisit the RADIUS message size over
> TCP.
> I do not believe the discussion supports the idea that this draft will
> be a singular solution.
> So, I'd ask the chairs to clarify.

In the mail you quoted I also said:

"agrees with. whether we need further documents on fragmentation, e.g. as
a generic long term solution is to be seen and discussed."

which should be clear answer for what you ask above. We can revisit the
fragmentation topic if the current WG I-D does not fit in all use cases
and there can be further documents. Whether we would need to recharter
for more documents on fragmentation or whether just new milestones are
sufficient, I have not thought about yet.

- Jouni

> 
> --Sam