Some (minor) editorial comments on RFC 3748b
From: Florent Bersani (florent.bersanird.francetelecom.fr)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 03:44:16 -0400 (EDT)
Hi all,

Below are some (minor) editorial comments that came to my mind while reading the latest version of EAP I am aware of (RFC 3748.b).

Much like my comments on the EAP state machine, I know that these comments may come much too late :-((

Hence, I included in this mail only the editorial comments that I think are (relatively) easy to address (in a mail to come, I'll formalize my other technical and general comments on EAP, being aware that they can't be taken into account for they come well after the battle)

Comment #1

Section 1.2

Some entries start with a capital letter (e.g. Supplicant, Displayable Message, ...) while others do not (authenticator, peer,...).
Suggested change: adopt a constant behavior (namely start all entries with a capital letter)


This capitalization problem is all the more shocking with "authenticator" because this entry is written "authenticator" and in the definition text we may read authenticator with a capital A ("The term Authenticator is used in [IEEE-802.1X <mailbox:///C%7C/DOCUMENTS%20AND%20SETTINGS/FLORENT/APPLICATION%20DATA/Thunderbird/Profiles/default/rv09wr8p.slt/Mail/Local%20Folders/Drafts?number=59209688#ref-IEEE-802.1X>], and has the same meaning in this document.")
Suggested change: adopt a constant behavior for this term throughout the document.


Comment #2

Section 1.2

I disagree with the RFC 3748 definition of MIC:
"Message Integrity Check (MIC) A keyed hash function used for authentication and integrity protection of data. This is usually called a Message Authentication Code (MAC), but IEEE 802 specifications (and this document) use the acronym MIC to avoid confusion with Medium Access Control."


Keying a hash function is not the only cryptographic way to provide data origin authentication and I do not see why EAP mandates such a restriction for its MICs.
Suggested changes: either adopt/adapt the IEEE 802.11i definition
"Message Integrity Code (MIC): A value generated by a symmetric key cryptographic function. If the input data is changed, a new value cannot be correctly computed without knowledge of the symmetric key. Thus, the secret key protects the input data from undetectable alteration. This is traditionally called a Message Authentication Code, or MAC, but the acronym MAC is already reserved for another meaning in this standard." (BTW, IEEE 802.11i quite logically mandates MIC/MAC to come from symmetric key cryptography since this is how the term MAC is commonly used, however it again worth noting that there are asymmetric techniques than can also provide data origin authentication - IINM, symmetric cryptography is rather used for data origin authentication for performance reasons)
or this one "Message Integrity Code (MIC) Informally, the purpose of a MIC is to facilitate, without the use of any additional mechanisms, assurances regarding both the source of a message and its integrity, please refer to [HAC] for more details This is usually called a Message Authentication Code (MAC), but IEEE 802 specifications (and this document) use the acronym MIC to avoid confusion with Medium Access Control." where [HAC] = Menezes, A. et al., “Handbook of Applied Cryptography”, CRC Press, 1996.


Comment #3

Section 1.2

Rearrange section 1.2 with the entries sorted in alphabetical order to improve readability

Comment #4

Section 5.1 2nd paragraph typo: replace "Some EAP implementations piggy-back various options into the Identity Request after a NUL-character" with "Some EAP implementations piggy-back various options into the Identity Request after a NULL-character" (the typo is on NULL IINM)

Also, it appears that sometimes NULL is capitalized, sometimes it isn't.
Suggested change: adopt a constant behavior

Hope this helps and you aren't upset by my being so particular about EAP WG documents,

Florent

Results generated by Tiger Technologies using MHonArc.