[radext] Re: Interim Meeting Tomorrow

[Valery Smyslov <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

 

at the meeting today a few shows of hands were done.

We have to confirm their results on the list.

 

1.	We agreed to add a text to draft-ietf-radext-radiusdtls-bis about ALPN

with indication, that ALPN is "SHOULD" (and not "MUST"). 

See also https://github.com/radext-wg/draft-ietf-radext-radiusdtls-bis/issues/158

 

2.	As to whether re-asses RadSEc connections when trust anchor(s) change,

there was weak consensus that we "MUST" do this. See also

https://github.com/radext-wg/draft-ietf-radext-radiusdtls-bis/issues/159

 

3.	There was a consensus not to mandate any specific logging when

a fallback from RadSec to RADIUS/UDP occurs. See also

https://github.com/radext-wg/draft-ietf-radext-radiusdtls-bis/issues/160

 

Since the resulting text should be added to a new version of the draft pretty

quickly to get the IESG members an ability to evaluate the updated version,

please chime in if you disagree with this desicions.

 

Regards,

Margaret & Valery.

 

 

 

Just a reminder that we have a radext interim meeting planned for tomorrow (Wednesday, February 25th) at 1400-1600 UTC (9:00am to 11am EST).

 

Details, including the time in your local time zone, can be found here:

 

https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2026-radext-01/session/radext

 

Agenda topic include:

 

- Feedback on the RadSec draft and planned changes to address the feedback.

 

- Proposed charter items and charter text, (including the question of whether we should consider any quantum-resistant algorithm support beyond TLS crypto-agility).

 

No other agenda topics were requested.

 

Hopefully this agenda will place us in a good position to move forward on our remaining and proposed WG work items starting at the March IETF.

 

Until tomorrow,

Margaret

Co-chair, radext WG