Please replace RADIUS Access-Challenge by RADIUS Access-Request in the sentence 
of my previous e-mail

"In other words, once the acceptor knows the peer's identity can send that 
EAP-start message in a RADIUS Access-Challenge..."

Best regards.

El 19/10/2011, a las 11:28, Rafa Marin Lopez escribió:

> Hi Sam:
> 
> El 19/10/2011, a las 00:23, Sam Hartman escribió:
> 
>>>>>>> "Rafa" == Rafa Marin Lopez <[email protected]> writes:
>> 
>>   Rafa> Hi Sam: El 18/10/2011, a las 18:55, Sam Hartman escribió:
>> 
>>>>>>>>> "Rafa" == Rafa Marin Lopez <[email protected]> writes:
>>>> 
>>   Rafa> Hi Sam: El 18/10/2011, a las 17:35, Sam Hartman escribió:
>>>> 
>>>>>> I think I may have been unclear in what I was proposing.  I'm
>>>>>> proposing that the peer send its identity in the first message
>>>>>> (*) and that the server gets to respond with type 4 or greater
>>>>>> (a specific EAP method).
>>>> 
>>   Rafa> Sending its identity does not mean that it must be carried in
>>   Rafa> the EAP response/identity. In fact what I suggested is to
>>   Rafa> carry the identity in the first message but not contained in
>>   Rafa> the EAP response/identity.
>>>> 
>>>> OK. Why not carry it in the EAP response/identity?  It seems
>>>> easier than developing new encoding.
>> 
>>   Rafa> Basically EAP is a lock-step protocol where it is required to
>>   Rafa> get a request to obtain a response (in the peer side)). So the
>>   Rafa> EAP peer state machine implementing the EAP standard protocol
>>   Rafa> will react after receiving an EAP request. So I see two
>>   Rafa> options: either you hack the EAP peer state machine to return
>>   Rafa> an EAP response/identity without receiving any EAP
>>   Rafa> request/identity (this "violates" the standard and so we need
>>   Rafa> to hack the EAP peer state machine) 
>> 
>> Or the initiator synthesizes a request and feeds it to the peer's state
>> machine.
> 
> Yes, this is another option, though I don't like either. The reason is 
> simple. AFAIK, the standard EAP does not say anything about a EAP lower-layer 
> synthesizing a request (which sounds like another type of hack). EAP requests 
> are sent by the authenticator. This is what the standard says.
> 
>> 
>> IN our implementation, even if the IETF decides on an an alternate
>> encoding for the identity, we'll end up synthesizing an identity request
>> and doing something with the identity response.
>> 
>> With a standard EAP library that is lock-step in the manner you
>> describe, it's far easier to produce a synthetic identity request in the
>> initiator than to hack the state machine or do anything else.  
> 
> As I said synthesizing an EAP request is another type of hack, because the 
> EAP protocol does not work like that. We have a RFC 3748 and RFC 5247 where 
> the EAP protocol is defined. I believe it would be good if we follow the 
> standards.
> 
>> Think of
>> it this way. In GSS-EAP, the identity request is generated by a party
>> very close to the initiator.  EAP already supports the identity request
>> being generated by a different party than the actual EAP messages. Why
>> does it matter whether the request comes from inside the peer or from a
>> NAS?
> 
> 
> Regarding this, you need to think about the mode independence property of EAP 
> where:
> 
> "As far as the EAP peer is concerned, its conversation with the EAP 
> authenticator, and all 
> consequences of that conversation, are identical, regardless of the 
> authenticator mode of operation."
> 
> In other words, under peer standpoint, all EAP requests are coming from the 
> EAP authenticator (the peer does not know and do not care if there is a 
> backend EAP server or it is integrated with the authenticator). 
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>>   Rafa> or directly at GSS-API
>>   Rafa> level you create a EAP response/identity and include the
>>   Rafa> identity (which seems weird taking into account that we have
>>   Rafa> an EAP stack in charge of creating EAP messages)
>> 
>> But if you don't create an EAP response/identity on the initiator you
>> probably do have to do it on the acceptor to trigger AAA to use EAP.
> 
> I don't think you need to do that. As I explained in the previous e-mail, in 
> RADIUS EAP (RFC 3579) you can find this text:
> 
> "Rather than sending an initial EAP-Request packet to the
>   authenticating peer, on detecting the presence of the peer, the NAS
>   MAY send an Access-Request packet to the RADIUS server containing an
>   EAP-Message attribute signifying EAP-Start.  The RADIUS server will
>   typically respond with an Access-Challenge containing EAP-Message
>   attribute(s) encapsulating an EAP-Request/Identity (Type 1).
>   However, an EAP-Request for an authentication method (Type 4 or
>   greater) can also be sent by the server.
> 
>   EAP-Start is indicated by sending an EAP-Message attribute with a
>   length of 2 (no data)."
> 
> 
> In other words, once the acceptor knows the peer's identity can send that 
> EAP-start message in a RADIUS Access-Challenge. Moreover it should include 
> the user-name in the request. With that, the RADIUS EAP server should start 
> the EAP method selected for that peer.
> 
> 
>> 
>>   Rafa> Personally, I do not like either (considering the standard RFC
>>   Rafa> 3748). So, I would prefer to define a subtoken for this.
>> 
>> We can do that. It means faking up an identity response on the
>> acceptor. But that is certainly not a big deal.
> 
> As explained, you do not need to fake up any identity response on the 
> acceptor. Just follow what RFC 3579 says.
> 
>> 
>> --Sam
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Rafael Marin Lopez, PhD
> Dept. Information and Communications Engineering (DIIC)
> Faculty of Computer Science-University of Murcia
> 30100 Murcia - Spain
> Telf: +34868888501 Fax: +34868884151 e-mail: [email protected]
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 

-------------------------------------------------------
Rafael Marin Lopez, PhD
Dept. Information and Communications Engineering (DIIC)
Faculty of Computer Science-University of Murcia
30100 Murcia - Spain
Telf: +34868888501 Fax: +34868884151 e-mail: [email protected]
-------------------------------------------------------




_______________________________________________
abfab mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab

Reply via email to