Re: [radext] RFC 5090 RADIUS client
Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com> Wed, 11 July 2012 16:16 UTC
Return-Path: <aland@deployingradius.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 74F6211E8110 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:16:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 LGVAiPsO+C-4 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:16:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from liberty.deployingradius.com (liberty.deployingradius.com [88.191.76.128]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 770FB11E810B for <radext@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:16:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4FFDA6DF.7040403@deployingradius.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:16:31 -0400
From: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Yehoshua Gev <yoshigev@gmail.com>
References: <CAF_j7ybJ8yK-mrFr=zaJEVpsAHmfxiauYh4Atwv=aGuXdNTY-Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAF_j7ybJ8yK-mrFr=zaJEVpsAHmfxiauYh4Atwv=aGuXdNTY-Q@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: radext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [radext] RFC 5090 RADIUS client
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: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:16:24 -0000
Yehoshua Gev wrote: > I hope that someone could answer some questions I have encountered with > when designing a SIP server supporting RFC 5090. The implementation status of RFC 5090 is poor. i.e. most implementations still use the format define in doc/rfc/draft-sterman-aaa-sip-00.txt I would suggest surveying RADIUS servers for their support of RFC 5090, versus their support of that draft. > 3. Statefulness > The RFC does not state whether the RADIUS client (HTTP-style server) can > work without keeping state. > Especially that it must respond with the State attribute in subsequent > Access-Request (section 5). > > If I understand the digest authentication scheme correctly, I believe > that the opaque directive is used for state. > Can opaque be used to store the State attribute? No. The State attribute is separate, and must be treated as separate. > May the RADIUS client modify the opaque directive, to include the both > Digest-Opaque and State attributes? I would suggest "no". Alan DeKok.
- [radext] RFC 5090 RADIUS client Yehoshua Gev
- Re: [radext] RFC 5090 RADIUS client Alan DeKok
- Re: [radext] RFC 5090 RADIUS client Yehoshua Gev