I've recently been reminded that I can be a bit too terse at times; it
appears that this is one of >those times. I blame MO ;-). Anyway, part of
RFC 3748 that I quoted says
Encapsulation of EAP within RADIUS [RFC3579]
satisfies ordering requirements, since RADIUS is a "lockstep"
protocol that delivers packets in order.
There are a couple of problems with this statement that I think are
pertinent to the question at >hand...
Given the discussion, it would appear to me that RADIUS does provide for ordering and non-duplicate delivery of EAP packets, although the "lockstep" aspect is not as important as the following statement from RFC 2865, Section 3:
"The RADIUS server can detect a duplicate request if it has the same client source IP address and source UDP port and Identifier within a short span of time."
Therefore, assuming that the replay window is large enough in proportion to the RTT, and the NAS RTO estimate is in the ballpark and being backed off, then it seems like the problem is covered.
Or am I missing something? -- 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/>