Authentication, Authorization and Accounting
charter-ietf-aaa-01

Document Charter Authentication, Authorization and Accounting WG (aaa)
Title Authentication, Authorization and Accounting
Last updated 2007-01-29
State Approved
WG State Concluded
IESG Responsible AD Dan Romascanu
Charter Edit AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

Charter
charter-ietf-aaa-01

The Authentication, Authorization and Accounting Working Group
focused on the development of requirements for Authentication,
Authorization and Accounting as applied to network access.
Requirements were gathered from NASREQ, MOBILE IP, and ROAMOPS
Working Groups as well as TIA 45.6. The AAA WG then solicited
submission of protocols meeting the requirements, and evaluated
the submissions.

This incarnation of the AAA Working Group will focus on development
of an IETF Standards track protocol, based on the DIAMETER submission.

In this process, it is to be understood that the IETF does not function
as a rubber stamp. It is likely that the protocol will be changed
significantly during the process of development.

The immediate goals of the AAA working group are to address the 
following issues:

- Clarity. The protocol documents should clearly describe the contents
  of typical messages and the requirements for interoperability.

- Error messages. The protocol should define categories of error 
  messages, enabling implementations to respond correctly based on the 
  category. The set of error messages should cover the full range of 
  operational problems.

- Accounting. The accounting operational model should be described for 
  each type of network access.

- IPv6. The protocol must include attributes in support for IPv6
  network access and must be transportable over IPv6.

- Transport. The protocol should be transport independent and must 
  define at least one mandatory-to-implement transport mapping. Other 
  transport mappings may also be defined. All transport mappings must 
  effectively support congestion control.

- Explicit proxy support. The protocol should offer explicit support
  for proxies, including support for automated message routing, route
  recording, and (where necessary) path hiding.

- RADIUS compatibility. The protocol should provide improved RADIUS 
  backward compatibility in the case where only RADIUS attributes are 
  used or where RADIUS proxies or servers exist in the path.

- Security. The protocol should define a lightweight data object 
  security model that is implementable on NASes.

- Data model. The proposal should offer logical separation between the
  protocol and the data model and should support rich data types.

- MIBs. A MIB must be defined, supporting both IPv4 and IPv6 operation.