[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Issue status update
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of David B. Nelson
> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 8:25 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: RE: Issue status update
> Bernard Aboba writes...
> > In going through the open Issues posted on the RADEXT Issues list
> > (http://www.drizzle.com/~aboba/RADEXT)
> > I was unclear about the status of the following issues.
> > RADIUS Crypto-Agility Requirements
> > Issue 274
> > Issue 275
> In think we are waiting form some suggested text that Joe
> Salowey offered to draft, regarding key management references
> and security considerations.
[Joe] Thanks for the reminder.
> There is also a basic issue with the use of the existing RADIUS "hint"
> mechanism to implement some rudimentary form of capability
> While I'm sympathetic to the limitations of this mechanism,
> unless the WG thinks we should expand the charter scope to
> create a more robust form of capabilities negotiation, I
> think it would be a mistake to add that as a
> requirement for crypto-agility. In short, I suggest we reject these
[Joe] I think most of the comments relating to the negotiation were that
the term "hint and consent" does not represent what is possible in
RADIUS. I don't think there was desire to change the behavior, just to
have the definition reflect the reality of the situation.
> to unsubscribe send a message to
> email@example.com with the word 'unsubscribe' in
> a single line as the message text body.
> archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.