eap Mailing List: Re: Issue 245: EAP Restart Issue

[Jari Arkko (jari.arkko]

I think the suggested change is OK.

--Jari

Bernard Aboba wrote:
> In going over the discussion on Issue 241, John Vollbrecht made a
> suggestion for a change to RFC 3748 that I think corrects an oversight. As
> the document is now Author 48 hours, it is still possible to correct the
> problem if the WG approves.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Issue 245: EAP Restart Issue
> Submitter name: John Vollbrecht
> Submitter email address: jrv [at] umich.edu
> Date first submitted: 5/7/2004
> Reference: http://mail.frascone.com/pipermail/eap/2004-May/002460.html
> Document: RFC2284bis-09
> Comment type: T
> Priority: S
> Section: 4.1
> Rationale/Explanation of issue:
>
> Section 4.1 of RFC 3748 states:
>
> "Additional Request packets MUST be sent until a valid Response packet is
> received, or an optional retry counter expires."
>
> Where the lower layer terminates the initial session and causes a restart,
> if EAP knows that the lower layer is terminated then I am not sure why it
> would continue to resend.
>
> Perhaps we should change this to:
>
> "Additional Request packets MUST be sent until a valid Response packet is
> received, an optional retry counter expires, or  a lower layer failure
> indication is received."