[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Consensus Call on RADEXT WG re-charter
Matt Holdrege wrote:
As far as backwards compatibility is concerned, I hope everyone realizes
that RADIUS is an extremely well installed **SERVICE** and a completely
new **SERVICE** would be a waste of everyone’s time. People can scream
and yell about having to twiddle bits in their servers and proxies but I
don’t care. It is the clients that you should really be concerned with.
Right. While I think the RADSEC folks indicate they have some client
implementations, my impression of the work is that its more useful
between the first-hop proxy and the home server.
For the RADESC folks: Is there any reason that the first-hop proxy
couldn't terminate a RADIUS (RADIUS over UDP) session with the NAS and
originate a RADSEC (RADIUS over TLS/TCP) session with the up-stream
proxies or home server?
--
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/>