IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [radext] WGLC #2 for draft-ietf-radext-dtls-04

Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com> Mon, 08 April 2013 17:09 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 C0AB221F9382 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:09:18 -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 eUqGvEqIGDrk for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:09:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from power.freeradius.org (power.freeradius.org [88.190.25.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F4AD21F8CE8 for <radext@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:09:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by power.freeradius.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 583D822410BC; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 19:09:18 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at power.freeradius.org
Received: from power.freeradius.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (power.freeradius.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A1yNdMhK3nJL; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 19:09:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Thor-2.local (bas1-ottawa11-1176224750.dsl.bell.ca [70.27.195.238]) by power.freeradius.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1B44C2240F50; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 19:09:16 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <5162F9BA.7030500@deployingradius.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 13:09:14 -0400
From: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Sam Hartman <hartmans@painless-security.com>
References: <1A5FDF7C-9E93-447E-A103-9700349CB2F5@gmail.com> <alpine.WNT.2.00.1304021450180.3988@SMURF> <515C3604.3040406@deployingradius.com> <alpine.WNT.2.00.1304042021411.3988@SMURF> <tslli8xnoms.fsf@mit.edu> <515ED047.3040200@deployingradius.com> <alpine.WNT.2.00.1304051020120.3988@SMURF> <5160255B.40409@deployingradius.com> <alpine.WNT.2.00.1304060913320.3988@SMURF> <5160B785.8070703@deployingradius.com> <tslppy5i2dm.fsf@mit.edu> <5162C651.2000200@deployingradius.com> <alpine.WNT.2.00.1304080801440.1952@littlesmurf> <tslppy5ghnf.fsf@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <tslppy5ghnf.fsf@mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: radext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [radext] WGLC #2 for draft-ietf-radext-dtls-04
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, 08 Apr 2013 17:09:18 -0000

Sam Hartman wrote:
> * we need to do something in this space.

  Agreed.

> * I'm against mandating that clients or proxies support upgrading from
>   UDP to DTLS without a restart/flag day

  OK.

> * I am in favor of requiring servers support clients upgrading without a
>   flag day. Alan's latching proposal seems like a fine option to get
>   that either as a SHOULD or MUST.

  OK.

  Or... we can delete all of the text around upgrade paths, and just use
a different port.

  I really don't care either way.  The upgrade text is there due to WG
consensus on the issue.  If the WG now has consensus on using a new port
instead, that's fine.  I'll have a new draft available tomorrow.

  Alan DeKok.

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status