Gong Cheng wrote: > I wonder if this is a small violation of the EAP-TTLS RFC (5281). > > In RFC 5281 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5281#section-9.2.2, it states: > > " .... Fragments other than the first MUST NOT have the L > bit set. ... > " > > while this behavior is configurable in eap.conf: ... > I confess that I only actually SEE the behavior in the now ancient 1.1.6 > version, and only took a quick look at the 2.1.0 config file and source code. > I apologize if I missed something or this had been brought up before.
I don't think it's serious. I don't know why this is a MUST NOT, because it makes very little difference to the protocol. And supplicants that break if the L bit is set on second fragments are badly written. Alan DeKok. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
