Issue: Editorial comments on draft-ietf-radext-digest-auth-03.txt

["Nelson, David" <dnelson@enterasys.com>]

Submitter name: David Nelson
Submitter email address: dnelson@enterasys.com
Date first submitted: August 16, 2005
Reference:
Document: DIGEST-03
Comment type: 'E' Editorial
Priority: '1' Should fix
Section: 1.1, 1.3, 2.1, 4.1, 4.2. 4.3

(1) Rationale/Explanation of issue:

1.1 Terminology

This document includes many instances of the normative keywords. It does
not clarify that the usage applies only to RADIUS Clients and Server
that implement the digest authentication feature described in the
document.

While this may be obvious to some, certain text would appear to be
creating retroactive normative requirements on existing implementations.

Requested changes:

Add the following text at the end of Section 1.1:

"The use of normative requirement key words in this document shall apply
only to RADIUS Client and RADIUS Server implementations that include the
features described in this document.  This document creates no normative
requirements for existing implementations."

(2) Rationale/Explanation of issue:

Typographical errors.

Requested Changes:

1.3 Overview

In the fourth paragraph:

s/where Digest authentication is/where Digest Authentication is/

In the eighth paragraph:

s/a configurable parameter/a configurable parameter./

2.1 RADIUS Client Behavior

In the second paragraph:

s/are situation where/are situations where/

s/MUST send zero or exactly one/MUST send exactly zero or one/

(3) Rationale/Explanation of issue:

Confusing text.

The third paragraph contains the phrase "If the RADIUS client recognizes
the nonce...".  This could use some clarification.  The definition of
"nonce" in Section 1.1 is "An unpredictable value...".  How is it
possible for the RADIUS client to recognize an unpredictable value?
Does this simply that the RADIUS client maintains a history of recently
used nonce values?  Or is there another meaning?

Requested changes:

Please add clarification.

(4) Rationale/Explanation of issue:

Move Diameter gateway considerations to the Diameter SIP Application
draft.

4.1 RADIUS Client Diameter Server
4.1 Diameter Client, RADIUS Server
4.3 Limitations

Requested Changes:

Delete these sections and add a general reference to the Diameter SIP
draft.  This presumes, of course, that consensus is concurrently
obtained in the AAA WG to make this change.

--
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/>