IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com> Thu, 04 April 2013 17:44 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 663CF21F8F0E for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 10:44:21 -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=[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 dFuwP+8stGY1 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 10:44:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from power.freeradius.org (power.freeradius.org [88.190.25.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 795E921F8FD3 for <radext@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 10:44:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by power.freeradius.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76EAE2240F53; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 19:44:19 +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 YWJCOMMt9jJb; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 19:44:19 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Thor-2.local (unknown [70.50.217.204]) by power.freeradius.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A199E2240C73; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 19:44:18 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <515DBBF1.9090102@deployingradius.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 13:44:17 -0400
From: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
References: <1A5FDF7C-9E93-447E-A103-9700349CB2F5@gmail.com> <alpine.WNT.2.00.1304021450180.3988@SMURF> <515C3604.3040406@deployingradius.com> <tslzjxffzay.fsf@mit.edu> <011601ce3157$103d4650$30b7d2f0$@augustcellars.com>
In-Reply-To: <011601ce3157$103d4650$30b7d2f0$@augustcellars.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: 'Sam Hartman' <hartmans@painless-security.com>, 'Peter Deacon' <peterd@iea-software.com>, radext-chairs@tools.ietf.org, 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: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 17:44:21 -0000

Jim Schaad wrote:
> On the other hand, I think you might be correct that requiring a 4K buffer
> on the data is correct behavior since if you go from a non-DTLS link to a
> DTLS link then you go from a 4K data buffer to a less than 4K data buffer
> size then leading to delivery problems.

  Yes.  Any choice is non-optimal.

> On the whole I do support this but it could be an implementation issue.
> Alan do you think this is a major implementation problem?

  It's annoying, but no.  It's pretty easy to change buffer sizes.  If
it's not, you're probably not going to implement any parts of DTLS.

  Alan DeKok.

v2.36.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status