Mobile IPv4 RADIUS Requirements
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04 and is now closed.
(Jari Arkko) (was Discuss, Yes) Yes
(Ron Bonica) No Objection
(Lisa Dusseault) No Objection
(Lars Eggert) No Objection
Comment (2007-06-20 for -)
> o All RADIUS work MUST be backward compatible with existing RADIUS > RFCs, including RFCs 2865-2869, 3162, 3575, 3576, 3579, 3580 and > 4668-4671. Should cite all the RFCs for which compatibility is being required.
(Russ Housley) No Objection
Comment (2007-06-21 for -)
From the Gen-ART Review by Vijay K. Gurbani... 1) Section 1: s/[RFC3957] all based/[RFC3957], all based (The comma improves readibility) 2) Section 3: s/reqiuired/required 3) Section 3.1: In the first and third bullet item, it appears appropriate that the word "required" be upper-cased to denote its use as a normative declaration. More so since bullet item two contains the word "MUST" in normative fashion. I believe that the authors are making a normative set of declarations for the goals, so it appears uneven to have a MUST in the second bullet item and not a pair of REQUIREDs in the other two bullets.
(Cullen Jennings) No Objection
(Chris Newman) No Objection
(Tim Polk) (was Discuss, No Objection) No Objection
Some "Minor nits" from Pasi Eronen's SecDir review: 1) Section 6, "When it comes to protecting attributes in Access Request, RFC 2868 section 3.5 provides a mechanism for encrypting RADIUS attributes": This should probably refer to Access-Accept messages, not Access-Requests. 2) The document contains many references to various RFCs that are not listed in the References section. To give just one example: "Existing RADIUS authentication procedures, e.g. Message-Authenticator (80) described in RFC2869, are used." 3) Section 3.1, "It is required of the RADIUS servers to be able to understand and process the attributes described in this specification" ...except that no attributes are described in this specification. 4) From idnits (if these references are useful, they should be mentioned somewhere in the text as well). == Unused Reference: 'I-D.nakhjiri-radius-mip4' is defined on line 231, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2868' is defined on line 236, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3579' is defined on line 239, but no explicit reference was found in the text