eap Mailing List: Re: Proposed Resolution of Issue 188: Packet ordering

[Jari Arkko (jari.arkko]

Looks OK. Thanks.

--Jari

Bernard Aboba wrote:
> The text of Issue 188 is enclosed below.   The proposed fix is as follows:
>
> Add to Section 3.1, at the end of item [6]:
>
> Reordering, if it occurs, will typically result in an EAP
> authentication failure, causing EAP authentication to be
> rerun. In an environment in which reordering is likely,
> it is therefore expected that EAP authentication failures
> will be common. It is RECOMMENDED that EAP only be run
> over lower layers that provide ordering guarantees;
> running EAP over raw IP or UDP transport is NOT
> RECOMMENDED. Encapsulation of EAP within RADIUS
> [RFC3579] satisfies ordering requirements, since
> RADIUS is a "lockstep" protocol that delivers
> packets in order.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Issue 188: Packet Ordering
> Submitter name: Margaret Wasserman
> Submitter email address: Margaret.Wasserman [at] nokia.com
> Date first submitted: October 23, 2003
> Reference:
> Document: RFC 2284bis-06
> Comment type: T
> Priority: S
> Section: 2.3
> Rationale/Explanation of issue:
>
> Is the current wording/diagram in the document clear
> enough with respect to the need for IP-based
> transports to include a mechanism to ensure packet order?
> Or do you think that we should add a couple of sentences
> to make this more explicit and explain what "/IP" means
> in Figure 2?
>
> _______________________________________________
> eap mailing list
> eap [at] frascone.com
> http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap