I have no immediate qualms about this text.

Jim


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> Of Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 3:37 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [abfab] Summary of proposed changes to eat applicability document
> 
> After going through the comments on the list here is where I think we are
> with changes to the document:
> 
> 1) Section 3
> 
> OLD
>    It is important
>    for the protocol carrying EAP to prove possession of the EAP MSK
>    between the EAP Peer and EAP Authenticator.
> 
> NEW
> The protocol carrying EAP MUST prove possession of the EAP MSK
>    between the EAP Peer and EAP Authenticator.
> 
> ADD
> 
> In the context of EAP for Application-Layer Access the application is
providing
> the EAP Lower Layer.   Applications protocols vary so their specific
behavior
> and transport characteristics needs to be considered when determining
their
> retransmission and re-authentication behavior as discussed in section 3.
> 
> 
> 3)  Retransmissions
> 
> ADD
> 
> 2.1 Retransmission
> 
> In EAP, the authenticator is responsible for retransmission. By default
EAP
> assumes that the lower layer (the application in this context) is
unreliable.
> The authenticator can send a packet whenever its retransmission timer
> triggers. In this mode, applications need to be able to receive and
process
> EAP messages at any time during the authentication conversation.
> 
> Alternatively, EAP permits a lower layer to set the retransmission timer
to
> infinite. When this happens, the lower layer becomes responsible for
reliable
> delivery of EAP messages. Applications that use a lock-step or
client-driven
> authentication protocol might benefit from this approach.
> 
> In addition to retransmission behavior applications need to deal with
> discarded EAP messages. For example, whenever some EAP methods
> receive  erroneous input, these methods discard the input rather than
> generating an error response. If the erroneous input was generated by an
> attacker, legitimate input can sometimes be received after the erroneous
> input. Applications MUST handle discarded EAP messages, although the
> specific way in which discarded messages will be handled depend on the
> characteristics of the application. Options include failing the
authentication at
> the application level, requesting an EAP
> retransmit and waiting for additional EAP input.
> 
> Specifications of how EAP is used for application authentication SHOULD
> document how retransmission and message discards are handled.
> 
> 4) Re-Authentication
> 
> ADD
> 
> 2.2 Re-Authentication
> 
> EAP lower layers MAY provide a mechanism for re-authentication to happen
> within an existing session [RFC 3748]. Diameter standardizes a mechanism
for
> a AAA server to request re-authentication [RFC 4005]. Re-authentication
> permits security associations to be updated without establishing a new
> session. For network access, this can be important because interrupting
> network access can disrupt connections and media.
> 
> Some applications might not need re-authentication support. For example if
> sessions are relatively short-lived or if sessions can be replaced without
> significant disruption, re-authentication might not provide value.
Protocols
> like HypertextTransport Protocol (HTTP) and Simple Mail Transport Protocol
> (SMTP) are examples of protocols where establishing a new connection to
> update security associations is likely to be sufficient.
> 
> Re-authentication is likely to be valuable if sessions or connections are
long-
> lived or if there is a significant cost to disrupting them.
> 
> Another factor may make re-authentication important. Some protocols only
> permit one part in a protocol (for example the client) to establish a new
> connection. If another party in the protocol needs the security
association
> refreshed then re-authentication can provide a mechanism to do so.
> 
> Lower layers SHOULD describe whether re-authentication is provided and
> which parties can initiate it.
> _______________________________________________
> abfab mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab

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

Reply via email to