| RE: RE: [Isms] RADIUS is not a trusted third party | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
|
From: Glen Zorn (gwz) (gwz |
|
| Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:58:04 -0400 (EDT) | |
Alper Yegin <> supposedly scribbled: > Glen, > >>> what is radius for you? (you write that it is not a trusted third >>> party.) >> >> It's not. From the point of view of authentication protocols (PAP, >> CHAP, EAP, etc.), both RADIUS and Diameter are just "wires": > > What happens when we look at this picture from the "authorization" > perspective? "Host-to-NAS authorization for the network access > service" > is dynamically generated from "host-to-AAA server" authorization and > "AAA server to client (NAS)" authorization. Wouldn't this constitute > a 3-party model? I'm pretty sure that both Sam & I were just talking about authentication. In any case, could you expound a bit? I don't actually know what you're talking about. What do "Host-to-NAS authorization for the network access service", "host-to-AAA server authorization" and "AAA server to client (NAS) authorization" mean? Are you saying that somehow the host authorizes the NAS to provide it network access? > > Alper > > >> the >> operation of the auth protocols should be exactly the same as if they >> terminated in the AAA client, instead of elsewhere. Basically, the >> purpose of AAA (again, from the POV of an authentication >> protocol) is simply scaling. BTW, a lot of misery has been caused by >> the erroneous belief that EAP is (or can be) a three-party >> authentication protocol: it isn't, and can't be. It could _carry_ a >> three-party protocol (like Kerberos), but EAP in itself is a >> two-party protocol. >> >>> why do you care that only one party knows that radius is used? it >>> could also be diameter. >>> >>> i would like to better understand why some people dislike the aaa >>> architecture (radius, diameter). >> >> I think that the misunderstanding mentioned above might have >> something to do with it... >> >>> >>> ciao >>> hannes >>> >>> >>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>>> Von: isms-bounces [at] lists.ietf.org >>>> [mailto:isms-bounces [at] lists.ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Sam Hartman >>>> Gesendet: Freitag, 15. April 2005 19:34 >>>> An: Martin Soukup >>>> Cc: isms [at] ietf.org >>>> Betreff: [Isms] RADIUS is not a trusted third party >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> "Martin" == Martin Soukup <msoukup [at] nortel.com> writes: >>>> >>>> Martin> RADIUS "Access-Accept" indicates a successful >>>> Martin> authenthentication response for a user. >>>> >>>> Martin> The Access-Accept already returns a "Session-Timeout", >>>> Martin> defined as "Sets the maximum number of seconds of >>>> service Martin> to be provided to the user before the session >>>> Martin> terminates. This attribute value becomes the per-user >>>> Martin> "absolute timeout."". >>>> >>>> This only tells the SNMP engine talking to the RADIUS server the >>>> timeout. You need to tell the other side of the exchange the >>>> timeout too. >>>> >>>> Remember that RADIUS is a callout service; it is not a trusted >>>> third party. In other words, in a particular SNMP authentication, >>>> only one of the parties will know that RADIUS is being used. >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Isms mailing list >>>> Isms [at] lists.ietf.org >>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Isms mailing list >>> Isms [at] lists.ietf.org >>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms >> >> Hope this helps, >> >> ~gwz >> >> Why is it that most of the world's problems can't be solved by simply >> listening to John Coltrane? -- Henry Gabriel >> _______________________________________________ >> eap mailing list >> eap [at] frascone.com >> http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap > > > _______________________________________________ > eap mailing list > eap [at] frascone.com > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap Hope this helps, ~gwz Why is it that most of the world's problems can't be solved by simply listening to John Coltrane? -- Henry Gabriel
-
RE: [Isms] RADIUS is not a trusted third party Glen Zorn (gwz), April 17 2005
-
RE: RE: [Isms] RADIUS is not a trusted third party Alper Yegin, April 19 2005
- RE: RE: [Isms] RADIUS is not a trusted third party Glen Zorn (gwz), April 19 2005
- RE: RE: [Isms] RADIUS is not a trusted third party Alper Yegin, April 20 2005
-
RE: RE: [Isms] RADIUS is not a trusted third party Alper Yegin, April 19 2005
- RE: RE: [Isms] RADIUS is not a trusted third party Glen Zorn (gwz), April 19 2005
-
Re: RE: [Isms] RADIUS is not a trusted third party Jeff Mandin, April 20 2005
- RE: RE: [Isms] RADIUS is not a trusted third party Glen Zorn (gwz), April 20 2005
Results generated by Tiger Technologies using MHonArc.