Re: [radext] BoF request for IETF 115

Alan DeKok <> Tue, 04 October 2022 17:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63138C1522CE for <>; Tue, 4 Oct 2022 10:59:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.908
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UnxbpnLlMTDC for <>; Tue, 4 Oct 2022 10:59:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 884F9C14F613 for <>; Tue, 4 Oct 2022 10:59:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE13132; Tue, 4 Oct 2022 17:59:06 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: NetworkRADIUS; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.\))
From: Alan DeKok <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2022 13:59:05 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <>
To: Jan-Frederik Rieckers <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [radext] BoF request for IETF 115
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: RADIUS EXTensions working group discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2022 17:59:17 -0000

On Oct 4, 2022, at 8:09 AM, Jan-Frederik Rieckers <> wrote:
> On 03.10.22 10:46, Margaret Cullen wrote:> In our efforts to operate and support a large, proxied RADIUS fabric, we
>> often wish we had a Status-Server equivalent that would cross proxies (like a multi-hop RADIUS ping), with or without a path tracing capability.
>> I’d be happy to contribute to an effort to provide something like that, if others agree it is needed.
> Speaking as a national eduroam roaming operator in Germany, I had issues detecting routing problems and would definitely welcome a probing method that gives better information then "I've started eapol_test and looked at the response using wireshark combined with my radsecproxy logs and it looked ok™"

  There are a few different possibilities here:

* some kind of of traceroute which works its way through the proxy chain.  This would have to be a new packet type.  There are many problems to solve here.  But it would be the easiest thing to define in the short term.

* a "query next hop" packet, which tells you about the state of the next hop
  * this could potentially be extended to include realm information, and topology information

* a global "route distribution" protocol.  That would likely best be done via some non-RADIUS methods.

  Alan DeKok.