Subject: (radius) RE: Problem with tunnel-auth-06 and Tag

From: "Beadles, Mark A." <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 16:32:02 -0400

I concur that the current RADIUS protocol severely hampers our ability to
add new functionality.

In the absence of being able to write a completely sane set of attributes,
then by all means, let's make the current language unambiguous enough that
we can get interoperability among vendors.  We would REALLY like to deploy
systems based on the functionality in this draft - and we cannot if we do
not have interop.

The biggest problem that we have found is that the Tunnel-Password Tag is
treated differently from all others, and it is very easy for an implementor
to miss or misinterpret this.

I know that these are not written in formal language, but at the very least
we need to explicitly state what behavior is expected for all possible
values.   If a particular Tag field value is not allowed in certain cases,
we must explicitly state what a receiver is supposed to _do_ if it receives
it.  In particular:

-What does a receiver do if it receives a Tag field > 0x1F in a
Tunnel-Preference attribute?
-What does a receiver do if it receives a Tag field of 0x00 in a
Tunnel-Password attribute?

+ Mark Anthony Beadles +  UUNET Product Development  + 
+  [email-masked]   + http://networking.us.uu.net +
+  Voice 614.723.1941  +       Fax 614.723.8407      +

-
To unsubscribe, email [email-masked]' with
'unsubscribe ietf-radius' in the body of the message.