Re: Proposed Resolution of Issue 223: Event-Timestamp and Duplicate Detection

[Alan DeKok <aland@nitros9.org>]

Bernard Aboba wrote:
> Recommendation is to replace that text (which has remained in RFC
> 3576bis) by the following:
> 
> "RADIUS clients implementing this specification
> MUST be capable of detecting a duplicate request if it has the same
> server source IP
> address, source UDP port and Identifier within a short span of time."

  Yes.

  Do we want to mention that clients can have multiple ports open?  The
key I've been using on the client side are (socket, server IP, server
port, Identifier).  On the server side, (socket, client IP, client port,
Identifier).

  I haven't heard of anyone discarding duplicates because they got
confused about client sockets, so maybe adding text to address that
isn't necessary.

> If this is done, then the quoted text above from Section 6.4 becomes
> redundant, and can be replaced by:
> 
> As noted in Section 2.3, duplicate detection is REQUIRED
> for RADIUS clients implementing this specification.

  Yes.

  Alan DeKok.


--
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/>