Vidya - we're hoping to get a list of requirements from the DSL Forum, which
we can use as the basis for analyzing how to provide subscriber
authentication.

- Ralph


On 4/17/07 4:09 AM, "Narayanan, Vidya" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Having read the messages in this thread and having skimmed
> draft-pruss-dhcp-auth-dsl, I think we are talking about a case of
> authentication here required to ensure that only authenticated and
> authorized clients obtain the config information. DHCP message
> authentication doesn't quite seem to be a goal. Please correct me if I'm
> wrong here. 
> 
> On whether we should be defining a means of carrying EAP in DHCP, I
> would vote no. EAP is designed to work in cases where the clients may
> greedily attempt network access, while the network requires
> authentication. So, the case where the client attemtps DHCP and the
> network sends an EAP Request/Identity to trigger EAP is very much a
> common model. EAPoL (802.1x) is already a defined encapsulation for EAP
> and is meant to occur before any IP-level configuration is obtained.
> 
> On using EAP-MD5, I understand the need to re-use available credentials.
> However, it is important to note that such authentication doesn't
> provide any key material and hence, subsequent exchanges can't be
> secured based on that. This means that there is no means of correlating
> the DHCP exchange with an entity that authenticated successfully - so, a
> different entity that manages to spoof the MAC address of the
> authenticated entity can get away with obtaining the same information.
> I'm not sure how much of a concern that is in the DSL environment, but,
> if ethernet is to be the L2, that seems feasible to me. I am guessing
> that we are perhaps relying on some kind of mapping between an actual
> wire and the authenticated entity here?
> 
> In general, we need to look at the requirements more closely before we
> define using DHCP as another lower layer for EAP. At least from what I
> see so far here, it doesn't seem required. And, keeping with the more
> general view of using EAP as a tool for network access prior to
> exchanging any other data, including DHCP or perhaps NDP in the v6
> world, seems like a good idea.
> 
> Regards,
> Vidya
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alan DeKok [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 6:08 PM
>> To: Curtis Sherbo
>> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Discussion of subscriber authentication
>> 
>> Curtis Sherbo wrote:
>>> ...  The BRAS will not install a
>>> forwarding entry for a subscriber that it has not learned
>> through the 
>>> DHCP process.  Forwarding entries are then built based on
>> the assigned 
>>> IP address and the requesting MAC.
>> 
>>   Ah. That wasn't clear from the draft.
>> 
>>> 3) Service providers typically do not want to allow
>> configuration of a
>>> client until they are authenticated.  Often because they
>> will provide 
>>> alternate configuration depending on their identification.
>> 
>>   That's fine.  Can they use EAP?
>> 
>>> 4) The goal of draft-pruss-dhcp-auth-dsl is to provide an
>> option for 
>>> service providers to maintain their investment in their current AAA
>>> infrastructures with little or no changes to them.  I don't
>> believe it 
>>> is intended to alter DHCP server implementations, but rather
>>> proxy/relays/servers that are implemented in BRAS platforms.  I
>>> suppose this is really the area for debate.
>> 
>>   The draft could be implemented by having the relay filter &
>> edit DHCP requests.  That's awkward, though, and possible
>> only because the DHCP packets are unsigned....
>> 
>>> 5) Client side implementations that would require modification are
>>> typically in the control of the service provider.  They may be a
>>> managed residential gateway, or a dsl modem.  User owned
>> equipment is 
>>> typically not allowed to authenticate the PPPoE session
>> today, I would 
>>> see this as being no different.
>> 
>>   An alternate solution that would achieve the same goal, but
>> wouldn't require piggy-backing authentication onto DHCP would
>> be to use EAP.
>> EAP-MD5 is already supported by all supplicants, and is just CHAP.
>> Using EAP also permits the authentication methods to be
>> updated without modifying DHCP.
>> 
>>   The only problem is that wired authentication does not have
>> the equivalent of wireless systems broadcasting SSID's.  That
>> problem can be addressed via the following method.
>> 
>>   1) Client sends a DHCP DISCOVER or DHCP request
>>   2) relay (BRAS) responds with "DHCP AUTH required"
>>      This would be a new DHCP message, containing a list of
>>      authentication domains (read: SSIDs).
>>   3) Client does EAP to BRAS
>>   4) on EAP success, client performs DHCP again.
>> 
>>   The downside to this approach is that it requires more code
>> on the client and on the BRAS than just putting CHAP into
>> DHCP.  The upside is that I think it may get wider acceptance
>> than CHAP inside of DHCP.  It leaves authentication to EAP,
>> and network configuration to DHCP.
>> 
>>   i.e. one of the widely acknowledged problems in performing
>> EAP authentication for wired networks is the inability to
>> know that EAP is a requirement.  A related problem is that
>> even if the client knows EAP is required, it doesn't know
>> which network it is connected to, and therefore which
>> credentials it should present.
>> 
>>   With this approach, it's clear that the BRAS is blocking
>> all DHCP traffic, and not rewriting packets.  It's also clear
>> that DHCP servers do not have to change.  DHCP clients have
>> to change, but hopefully minimally, and only to kick-start an
>> EAP session when a DHCP "Auth required" packet is received.
>> The existing client DHCP timers for retransmits, etc. could
>> even be left alone, as the EAP session *should* finish before
>> the next DHCP request is sent.
>> 
>>   If this appears to be a viable approach, I can write up a
>> draft this coming week.
>> 
>>   Alan DeKok.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Int-area mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to