We have had a lot of productive discussion on this topic.  I feel
comfortable calling consensus that we should add protected result
indicators to EAP-TLS 1.3.

There also seems to be consensus to use TLS Failure alert for failure
result indications.

How to represent success indicators is not as clear.  Fortunately, we have
two options that seem to have some support.

1. Zero-byte application record.  Multiple implementations already use this
mechanism and it is clear that the EAP-TLS peer and server "application"
can receive and send this indicator.  There were additional concerns about
the ordering of this application data record in the flight, but it seems
that this should not be a problem as long as the TLS library is fed the
entire EAP-TLS message containing the flight to process.

2. Close-Notify Alert.  This would use an existing TLS message to signal
success.  We have had some implementation reports that the EAP-TLS server
"application" can trigger the close_notify on at least one library.  I have
not heard any news from implementers if close_notify is accessible to the
EAP-TLS peer/supplicant "application".  I think it is not clear if the
signal would be accessible to implementers for both the EAP-TLS peer and
server.

I'd like to hear from implementers about their experience with this
mechanism:

1. Have you implemented the zero byte application record signa? If not, why
not?l
a. Is it sent after receiving the client finished?
b. Do you anticipate problems if the application record comes before or
after a NewSessionTicket message?
c. did you run into any issues with this mechanism?

2. Have you implemented the close notify method? If not, why not?
a. Is it sent after receiving the client finished?
b. Were you able to cause the message to be sent for the server or
determine that the message was received for the peer/supplicant?
c. Did you run into any issues with this mechanism?

Joe

On Sat, Feb 6, 2021 at 5:22 PM Joseph Salowey <[email protected]> wrote:

> There is growing support for mandating result indicators for EAP-TLS 1.3.
> The result indicators help protect the EAP protocol exchange in the many
> different types of environments EAP-TLS is used and make the integration
> with the EAP state machine clearer.  This has the impact of adding a round
> trip to EAP-TLS 1.3 making a total of 4.5 round trips.  It may be possible
> to optimize this exchange, but that would need further study and would be
> beyond the scope of this effort.
>
> This consensus call has two parts:
>
> 1. Please respond to the list if you support adding explicit result
> indications of success and failure from the EAP Server to the EAP Peer in
> EAP-TLS 1.3.  If you object please respond to the list indicating why.
>
> 2. Please respond to the list if you support using TLS close_notify alert
> for a success indication and TLS error alert for a failure indication.  If
> you object please respond to the list indicating why.
>
> This call will run for 1 week.  Please respond by February 15, 2021.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joe
>
_______________________________________________
Emu mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu

Reply via email to