|
The consensus call on the RADEXT WG re-charter ended on April 28. After going over the RADEXT WG mailing list discussion, I believe that WG consensus was achieved on the proposed charter, modified to take into account the proposed change to the backwards compatibility language proposed by Glen Zorn: "- All documents produced MUST specify means of interoperation with legacy RADIUS implementations and, if possible, be backward compatible with existing RADIUS RFCs, including RFCs 2865-2869, 3162, 3575, 3579, 3580, 4668-4673,4675, 5080, 5090 and 5176." Here is my summary of the opinions expressed on the list: In favor (6) Alan DeKok: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext/2008/msg00221.html Stefan Winter: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext/2008/msg00232.html Mauricio Sanchez: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext/2008/msg00248.html Mudit Goel: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext/2008/msg00258.html Mike McCauley: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext/2008/msg00234.html Steve Hanna: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext/2008/msg00206.html No explicit opinion expressed: (2) Avi Lior: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext/2008/msg00268.html Matt Holdredge: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext/2008/msg00240.html Against (2): Glen Zorn (many postings) Joe Salowey: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/radiusext/2008/msg00211.html The full text of the modified charter is enclosed below: =======================================================
Description of Working Group:
The RADIUS Extensions Working Group will focus on extensions to the RADIUS protocol required to define extensions to the standard attribute space as well as to address cryptographic algorithm agility and use over new secure transports. In addition, RADEXT will work on RADIUS Design Guidelines and define new attributes for particular applications of authentication, authorization and accounting such as NAS management and local area network (LAN) usage. In order to enable interoperation of heterogeneous RADIUS/Diameter deployments, all RADEXT WG work items MUST contain a Diameter compatibility section, outlining how interoperability with Diameter will be maintained. Furthermore, to ensure backward compatibility with existing RADIUS implementations, as well as compatibility between RADIUS and Diameter, the following restrictions are imposed on extensions considered by the RADEXT WG: - All documents produced MUST specify means of interoperation with
legacy RADIUS implementations and, if possible, be backward compatible with existing RADIUS RFCs, including RFCs 2865-2869, 3162, 3575, 3579, 3580, 4668-4673,4675, 5080, 5090 and 5176. - All RADIUS work MUST be compatible with equivalent facilities in Diameter. Where possible, new attributes should be defined so that the same attribute can be used in both RADIUS and Diameter without translation. In other cases a translation considerations section should be included in the specification. Work Items The immediate goals of the RADEXT working group are to address the following issues: - RADIUS design guidelines. This document will provide guidelines for design of RADIUS attributes. It will specifically consider how complex data types may be introduced in a robust manner, maintaining backwards compatibility with existing RADIUS RFCs, across all the classes of attributes: Standard, Vendor-Specific and SDO-Specific. In addition, it will review RADIUS data types and associated backwards compatibility issues. - RADIUS Management authorization. This document will define the use of RADIUS for NAS management over IP. -RADIUS attribute space extension. The standard RADIUS attribute space is currently being depleted. This document will provide additional standard attribute space, while maintaining backward compatibility with existing attributes. -RADIUS Cryptographic Algorithm Agility. RADIUS has traditionally relied on MD5 for both per-packet integrity and authentication as well as attribute confidentiality. Given the increasingly successful attacks being mounted against MD5, the ability to support alternative algorithms is required. This work item will include documentation of RADIUS crypto-agility requirements, as well as development of one or more Experimental RFCs providing support for negotiation of alternative cryptographic algorithms to protect RADIUS. - IEEE 802 attributes. New attributes have been proposed to support IEEE 802 standards for wired and wireless LANs. This work item will support authentication, authorization and accounting attributes needed by IEEE 802 groups including IEEE 802.1, IEEE 802.11 and IEEE 802.16. - New RADIUS transports. New secure transports for RADIUS will be developed, including TCP/TLS (RADSEC) and UDP/DTLS. - Documentation of Status-Server usage. A document describing usage of the Status-Server facility will be developed. Goals and Milestones: Jun 2008 RADIUS Design Guidelines submitted as a Best Current Practice RFC Jun 2008 RADIUS Management Authorization I-D submitted as a Proposed Standard RFC Sep 2008 RADIUS Crypto-agility Requirements submitted as an Informational RFC Sep 2008 Extended Attributes I-D submitted as a Proposed Standard RFC Dec 2008 IEEE 802 Attributes I-D submitted as a Proposed Standard RFC Mar 2009 Status-Server I-D submitted as a Proposed Standard RFC Mar 2009 RADSEC (RADIUS over TCP/TLS) draft submitted as an Experimental RFC June 2009 RADIUS over DTLS I-D submitted as an Experimental RFC June 2009 RADIUS Cryptographic Algorithm Agility I-D submitted as an Experimental RFC |