[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Strawman RADIUSEXT WG charter



Looks good to me. A few nits and questions inline:

RADIUS Extensions Working Group (RADIUSEXT)
Last Modified: 2003-08-19

Chair(s):
Bernard Aboba <aboba@internaut.com>
David Nelson <dnelson@enterasys.com>

Operations and Management Area Director(s):
Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Bert Wijnen <bwijnen@lucent.com>

Operations and Management Area Advisor:
Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>

Mailing Lists:
General Discussion: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
To Subscribe: radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org, In Body: subscribe
Archive: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext

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,
Maybe explicitly say somewhere that actual attrs for IP telephony
are done elsewhere, even if the attr space extension and other
features provided by this WG are used at the bottom?

authorization and accounting.  All extensions produced by this
working group are required to demonstrate backward compatibility with
the existing RADIUS protocol as well as compatibility with the
equivalent capabilities in the Diameter protocol. No new RADIUS commands
will be defined.

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

- Attribute space extension.  The RADIUS protocol, defined in
  RFC 2865, has an eight (8) bit attribute space, a good portion
  of which has already been allocated or is in use.  In order to
  address attribute exhaustion, an extended attribute space will be
  defined.

- RADIUS UDP transport profile.  The transport behavior of the RADIUS
  protocol is unspecified in RFC 2865 and 2866.  This has resulted in
  implementations lacking support for congestion control. This task
  involves specification of the RADIUS UDP transport mapping,
  providing support for congestion control and jittering.  Failover
  behavior is not part of this work item, although it may be
  considered in the future.  An explicit non-goal of this work item
  is to bring RADIUS up to the level of reliability achievable in
  Diameter.

- Pre-paid support.  Pre-paid 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, a specification is required.  The implementation of
  RADIUS prepaid needs to be compatible with RFC 2865 and 2866,
  as well as with Diameter prepaid capabilities.

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

Goals and Milestones:

Apr 04  RADIUS attribute space extension submitted as a Proposed Standard RFC.
Apr 04  RADIUS UDP transport profile submitted as a Proposed Standard RFC.
Sep 04  RADIUS pre-paid suport submitted as an Informational RFC.
s/suport/support/

Dec 04  RADIUS attributes for LANs submitted as an Informational RFC.
Is there a specific target group for this item? 802.11<something>?
What is their deadline, is Dec 04 OK for that? Or are there multiple
groups? If yes, do their ideas about the attributes agree?

--Jari



--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>