Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

[RPRWG] [Fwd: [802SEC] FW: [New-work] WG Review: RADIUS Extensions (radext)]



fyi

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [802SEC] FW: [New-work] WG Review: RADIUS Extensions (radext)
Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 09:05:42 -0700
From: "Congdon, Paul T (ProCurve)" <paul.congdon@HP.COM>
Reply-To: "Congdon, Paul T (ProCurve)" <paul.congdon@HP.COM>
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

New work in the IETF that may be of interest to IEEE 802 groups.
Chairs forward to your groups if appropriate.

-----Original Message-----
From: new-work-admin@ietf.org [mailto:new-work-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of The IESG
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 7:26 AM
To: new-work@ietf.org
Subject: [New-work] WG Review: RADIUS Extensions (radext)


A new IETF working group has been proposed in the Operations and
Management Area.
The IESG has not made any determination as yet. The following
description was
submitted, and is provided for informational purposes only. Please send
your
comments to the IESG mailing list (iesg@ietf.org) by May 26th.

RADIUS Extensions (radext)
----------------------------------------

Current Staus: Proposed Working Group

Description of Working Group:

The RADIUS Extensions Working Group will focus on extensions to the
RADIUS protocol required to enable its use in applications such as IP
telephony and Local Area Network authentication, authorization and
accounting.

In order to ensure backward compatibility with existing RADIUS
implementations, as well as compatibility between RADIUS and Diameter,
the following restrictions are imposed on extensions considered by the
RADEXT
WG:

- All RADIUS work MUST be backward compatible with existing RADIUS RFCs,
     including RFCs 2618-2621, 2865-2869, 3162, 3575, 3576, 3579, and
3580.
- All RADIUS work MUST be compatible with equivalent facilities in
     Diameter. Where possible, new attributes should be defined so that
     the same attribute can be used in both RADIUS and Diameter without
     translation. In other cases a translation considerations
     section should be included in the specification.
- No new RADIUS transports (e.g. TCP, SCTP) will be defined.

Work Items

The immediate goals of the RADEXT working group are to address the
following issues:

- RADIUS design guidelines. This document will provide guidelines
     for design of RADIUS attributes, including discussion of the
     appropriate use of RADIUS SDO-Specific Attributes (SSAs). This
     document will also review RADIUS data types and associated
     backwards compatibility issues.

- RADIUS implementation issues and fixes. This document will
     address common RADIUS implementation issues and describe
     proposed solutions.

- Revised NAI specification. This document, known as "RFC 2486bis"
     will revise the NAI specification to correct known errors,
     add support for privacy and internationalization, and provide
     more details on routing.

- Pre-paid support. Prepaid services are contemplated in a number
     of potential applications, including wireless LAN access and IP
     telephony. In order to enable support of pre-paid services in an
     interoperable way, the WG will provide definitions of the
     attributes required to support operator service models for
     pre-paid, as documented in liaison communications. This document
will
     include within it a specification for interoperation with
     Diameter Credit Control.

- SIP support. RADIUS is currently used for SIP authentication,
     authorization and accounting. Standardization of these attributes
     will enable improved interoperability.

     This document will be upwards compatible with the Diameter SIP
     application, and conform to existing IETF RFCs on HTTP Digest,
     including RFC 2617, 3261, and 3310.

- LAN attributes. New attributes have been proposed to enable use of
     authentication, authorization and accounting in wired and
     wireless LANs. Standardization of these attributes will enable
     improved interoperability.

- RADIUS MIB update. RFC 2618-2621 lack IPv6 compatibility, and modest
     changes are required to address this issue. MIBs for RFC 3576 are
     also needed.


_______________________________________________
New-work mailing list
New-work@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/new-work

----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
This list is maintained by Listserv.

--
Michael Takefman              tak@cisco.com
Distinguished Engineer,       Cisco Systems
Chair IEEE 802.17 Stds WG
3000 Innovation Dr, Ottawa, Canada, K2K 3E8
voice: 613-254-3399       cell:613-220-6991