[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-radext-fixes
Lars Eggert wrote:
> [ timers ]
> -06 specifies such a mechanism, which was the important part of my
> concern. A minor remaining nit is that the "within the limits of
> [RFC2865] Section 2.4" part should be removed, because that section in
> RFC2865 does not actually discuss any such limits.
>>> 2.2.2. Duplicate detection and orderly delivery.
> If clients need not perform duplicate detection, how are they supposed
> to silently discard later responses? No duplicate detection = no state
> about packets received in the past, right?
Yes. RADIUS is a request / response protocol. The client sends a
request, and looks for a matching response. Once it has a matching
response, it effectively forgets about the request.
If a duplicate response is received by the client, it is no different
than an *unsolicited* response. Neither one matches a pending request,
so the responses are discarded.
>> Section 2.2.2., paragraph 8:
>>> Each cache entry SHOULD be purged after a period of time. This time
>>> SHOULD be no less than 5 seconds, and no more than 30 seconds.
>> DISCUSS: The Internet MSL is 2 minutes - choosing this as a lower
>> bound will prevent late duplicates from remaining undetected.
> This has remained unchanged in -06 AFAICT.
As does my response: :)
In short, MSL doesn't matter to a server, as it doesn't see round trip
times. It sees a request, and responds to that request.
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.