eap Mailing List: Re: Issue 171: IKEv2 over TCP

[Yoshihiro Ohba (yohba]

I also found that "SHOULD" was replaced with "MAY".  I like this
replacement as well as the replacement of IKEv2 reference to PIC,
because I think lower-layer retranmission conflicts with silent
discarding of invalid messages in EAP (as I pointed out recently).

Yoshihiro Ohba


On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 04:33:46PM -0700, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> Issue 171: IKEv2 over TCP
> Submitter name: Bernard Aboba
> Submitter email address: aboba [at] internaut.com
> Date first submitted: 9/11/2003
> Reference:
> Document: EAP-05
> Comment type: T
> Priority: S
> Section: 2.2, 4.3
> Rationale/Explanation of issue:
> 
> IKEv2 runs over UDP, not TCP as implied in Section 2.2 and 4.3.
> 
> In Section 2.2, change:
> 
> "TCP [IKEv2]" to "TCP [PIC]".
> 
> In Section 4.3, change:
> 
> " When run over a reliable lower layer (e.g., EAP over ISAKMP/TCP, as
> within [IKEv2]), the authenticator retransmission timer SHOULD be set
> to an infinite value, so that retransmissions do not occur at the EAP
> layer. The peer may still maintain a timeout value so as to avoid
> waiting indefinitely for a Request."
> 
> To:
> 
> " When run over a reliable lower layer (e.g., EAP over ISAKMP/TCP, as
> within [PIC]), the authenticator retransmission timer MAY be set
> to an artificially high value, so that retransmissions do not occur
> at the EAP layer. The peer may still maintain a timeout value so
> as to avoid waiting indefinitely for a Request."
> 
> _______________________________________________
> eap mailing list
> eap [at] frascone.com
> http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap