RADIUS EXTensions (radext)
|Area||Operations and Management Area (ops)|
|Dependencies||Document dependency graph (SVG)|
Additional RADEXT Web Page
|Jabber chat||Room address||xmpp:email@example.com?join|
Charter for Working Group
The RADIUS Extensions Working Group will focus on extensions to the
RADIUS protocol pending approval of the new work from the Area Director
and clarify its usage and definition.
Furthermore, to ensure backward compatibility with existing RADIUS
implementations, as well as compatibility between RADIUS and Diameter,
the following restriction is imposed on extensions considered by the
All documents produced must specify means of interoperation with legacy
RADIUS and, if possible, be backward compatible with existing RADIUS
RFCs, including RFCs 2865-2869, 3162, 3575, 3579, 3580, 4668-4673,4675,
5080, 5090, 5176 and 6158. Transport profiles should, if possible, be
compatible with RFC 3539.
The WG will review its existing RFCs' document track categories and
where necessary or useful change document tracks, with minor changes in
the documents if needed. Any changes to document tracks require approval
by the responsible Area Director.
The immediate goals of the RADEXT working group are to address the
- CoA proxying. RFC 5176 permits proxying of CoA and Disconnect
messages, but makes no provisions for how that is done in a roaming
environment. This work item will provide descriptions of how to use
the Operator-Name attribute in a roaming environment to proxy CoA
packets in a way that ensures only authorized proxies can send these
packets to the home CoA server.
- Encoding Rules for EAP-Response/Identity packets over RADIUS. Neither
EAP (RFC3748) nor EAP over RADIUS (RFC3579) demand specific character
encoding and normalisation rules for EAP Identity responses. RADIUS
(RFC2865) requires User-Name attributes to be encoded in UTF-8. When a NAS
simply performs an exact copy of an EAP-Identity into a User-Name, invalid
packets might be produced. This document will suggest restrictions on EAP
Identities so that transport over AAA becomes correct under all circumstances
(UTF-8) and deterministic (normalisation).
- Data Types. RFC 2865 defines a number of data types, but later
documents do not use those types in a consistent way. This work item
will define data types, and update the IANA RADIUS Attribute Type
registry so that each attribute has a data type. Where necessary, it
will correct issues with previous specifications.
- Larger Packets. Support RADIUS packets greater than 4096-octets over
RADIUS transports with this capability.
- RADIUS Attributes for IP Port Configuration and Reporting. These
attributes are used by devices that implement IP port ranges to
configure and report TCP/UDP ports and ICMP identifiers, as well as
mapping behaviors. These attributes can be used in the context of
address sharing (e.g., NAT44 [RFC3022], Dual-Stack Lite AFTR [RFC6333],
CGN [RFC6888], NAT64 [RFC6146], Provider WLAN (e.g., [TR-146]), etc.).
|Nov 2016||Data Types as Informational RFC|
|Nov 2016||Submit Populating EAP Identity as BCP RFC|
|Mar 2016||IP Port RADIUS Extensions as Standards Track RFC|
|Nov 2015||Submit CoA Proxying as Standards Track RFC|
Larger Packets for RADIUS over TCP I-D submitted as an Experimental RFC
|Done||RADIUS packet fragmentation submitted as an Experimental RFC|
|Done||Dynamic Discovery I-D submitted as a Proposed Standard RFC|
|Done||RFC 4282bis submitted as a Proposed Standard RFC|