[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: RADEXT charter, Take 8



Hi all,

> Based on the above comments, I'd like to suggest the
> following text as the charter:

For what its worth, I agree with Jari's suggested modified charter.
I have more interest in the converged view of supporting both RADIUS
& Diameter, so I'm motivated by Jari's charter to be involved.

John

> AAA Extensions Working Group (AAAEXT) Charter
> Last Modified: 2004-03-24
> 
> Chair(s):
> David Nelson <dnelson@enterasys.com>
> 
> Operations and Management Area Director(s):
> David Kessens <david.kessens@nokia.com>
> Bert Wijnen <bwijnen@lucent.com>
> 
> Operations and Management Area Advisor:
> David Kessens <david.kessens@nokia.com>
> 
> Technical Advisor:
> Paul Congdon <paul_congdon@hp.com>
> 
> Mailing Lists:
> General Discussion: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> To Subscribe: radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org, In Body: subscribe
> Archive: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext
> 
> Description of Working Group:
> 
> The AAA Extensions Working Group will focus on maintaining
> AAA related specifications, adding support for the use of
> AAA protocols (RADIUS, Diameter) for Local Area Network
> authentication, authorization, and accounting, and adding
> support to the RADIUS porocol for IP telephony and prepaid
> applications.
> 
> In order to ensure backward compatibility with RADIUS as well as
> Diameter, the following restrictions are imposed on extensions
> considered by the WG:
> 
> - All work MUST be backward compatible with existing RADIUS RFCs,
>    including RFCs 2618-2621, 2865-2869, 3162, 3575, 3576, 3579,
>    and 3580.
> 
> - All extensions consisting of carrying additional information
>    attributes MUST be defined in a manner suitable for the use
>    of the same attributes in both RADIUS and Diameter.
> 
> - All other work MUST be compatible with equivalent facilities in
>    Diameter, if such facilities already exist. A Diameter Translation
>    Considerations section MUST be provided to describe the mapping
>    that a RADIUS-Diameter translation gateway would have to implement.
> 
> - The RADIUS maximum packet size (4K) will not be increased.
> 
> - No new RADIUS transports (e.g. TCP, SCTP) will be defined.
> 
> Work Items
> 
> The immediate goals of the AAAEXT working group are to address the
> following issues:
> 
> - RADIUS design guidelines.  This document will provide guidelines
>    for design of RADIUS attributes, including discussion of the
>    appropriate use of RADIUS SDO-Specific Attributes (SSAs). This
>    document will also review RADIUS data types and associated
>    backwards compatibility issues.
> 
> - Revised NAI specification.  This document, known as "RFC 2486bis"
>    will revise the NAI specification to correct known errors,
>    provide more details on routing, add support for privacy,
>    as well as handling internationalization.
> 
> - Pre-paid support.  Prepaid services are contemplated in a number
>    of potential applications, including wireless LAN access and IP
>    telephony.  In order to enable support of pre-paid services in an
>    interoperable way, the WG will provide definitions of the
>    attributes required to support operator service models for
>    pre-paid, as documented in liaison communications.  Support
>    will be included for time, volume, and event oriented charging
>    as well as support for limited differential charging.
>    This document will be compatible with Diameter Credit Control.
> 
> - SIP support.  RADIUS is currently used for SIP authentication,
>    authorization and accounting.  Standardization of these attributes
>    will enable improved interoperability.
> 
>    This document will be compatible with existing IETF RFCs
>    on HTTP Digest, including RFC 2617, 3261, and 3310.
> 
>    This document will be compatible with Diameter SIP application,
>    but not necessarily vice versa, as the Diameter SIP application
>    supports additional functionality such as routing.
> 
> - LAN attributes.  New attributes have been proposed to enable use of
>    authentication, authorization and accounting in wired and 
> wireless LANs.
>    Standardization of these attributes will enable improved
>    interoperability. These attributes are defined in a manner where
>    their use in both RADIUS and Diameter is possible through the
>    same document.
> 
> - MIB update.  RFC 2618-2621 lack IPv6 compatiblity, and modest
>    changes are required to address this issue.
> 
> Goals and Milestones:
> 
> Dec 04  Updated RADIUS MIBs submitted for publication.
> Dec 04  SIP authentication draft submitted as a Proposed Standard RFC.
> Dec 04  RFC 2486bis submitted as a Proposed Standard.
> Feb 05  WLAN attributes submitted as a Proposed Standard RFC.
> Dec 05  RADIUS design guidelines submitted as an Informational RFC.
> Dec 05  LAN attributes submitted as a Proposed Standard RFC.
> Dec 05  Prepaid draft submitted as a Proposed Standard RFC.
> 
> Quality Control Plan
> 
> In order to ensure quality of work:
> 
> * This WG will not be chartered until sufficient resources can be
>    demonstrated to be available to guarantee a high probability of
>    success.  This includes recruitment of a core of editors and
>    reviewers with significant IETF experience and demonstrated time
>    commitment.
> 
> * All drafts will need to undergo review prior to acceptance 
> as WG work
>    items, which includes demonstration that the drafts are backward
>    compatible with RADIUS RFCs and are compatible with equivalent
>    facilities in Diameter.  Given the backwards compatibility 
> issues, no
>    document including sub-attributes will be considered for 
> publication as
>    an RFC before the RADIUS design guidelines and RADIUS/Diameter
>    translation work items are completed, analyzing the issues in
>    a comprehensive way.
> 
> * The WG will utilize an automated issue tracking system.
> 
> * XML to RFC will be used in production of documents.  This enables
>    production of HTML and text files from a single source file as
>    well as automated production of difference files.
> 
> 
> --
> to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
> the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
> archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>
> 

--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>