Re: [radext] Liaison to government agencies

[Margaret Cullen <[e-mail]>]

> On Dec 1, 2022, at 2:58 PM, Margaret Cullen <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Nov 23, 2022, at 6:26 PM, Stephen Farrell <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>> On 23/11/2022 23:06, Bernard Aboba wrote:
>>> Stephen said:
>>> "Perhaps the charter text you'd like added would say that the WG needs to
>>> establish what protocol requirements need to be met for FIPS-140 compliance
>>> before defining anything?"
>>> [BA] That seems like a good way to go about it. 
>> 
>> Cool. Next step there would be for someone to propose
>> concrete wording for that, then our AD can decide to
>> update the draft charter or not. I can give it a shot
>> tomorrow if that's useful, and if nobody else does it
>> first:-)
> 
> How about replacing this bullet:
> 
> - Defining a secure variant of RADIUS which can be used in a FIPS-140
>   compliant environment.
> 
> With this:
> 
> - Determine what protocol requirements need to be met for FIPS-140 compliance and deployment, consulting with NIST staff and/or operators of FIPS-140 evironments, as needed.  If those protocol requirements are not met by the current RADIUS specifications, define a secure variant of FADIUS which can be used in a FIPS-140 compliant environment.

And., no, I am not suggesting we call anything “FADIUS”.  :-)

s/FADIUS/RADIUS

Margaret

> 
> Thoughts?
> Margaret
> 
>