📄 rfc2867.txt
字号:
IPsec in the tunnel mode), this Attribute need not be included in accounting packets, since in this case the Tunnel-Reject Attribute has the same meaning. If this value is used, the following attributes SHOULD also be included in the Accounting-Request packet: User-Name (1) NAS-IP-Address (4) Acct-Delay-Time (41) Acct-Terminate-Cause (49) Event-Timestamp (55) Tunnel-Type (64) Tunnel-Medium-Type (65) Tunnel-Client-Endpoint (66) Tunnel-Server-Endpoint (67) Acct-Tunnel-Connection (68)Zorn, et al. Informational [Page 6]RFC 2867 RADIUS Tunnel Accounting Support June 20004. Attributes4.1. Acct-Tunnel-Connection Description This Attribute indicates the identifier assigned to the tunnel session. It SHOULD be included in Accounting-Request packets which contain an Acct-Status-Type attribute having the value Start, Stop or any of the values described above. This attribute, along with the Tunnel-Client-Endpoint and Tunnel- Server-Endpoint attributes [3], may be used to provide a means to uniquely identify a tunnel session for auditing purposes. A summary of the Acct-Tunnel-Connection Attribute format is shown below. The fields are transmitted from left to right. 0 1 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | Length | String ... +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Type 68 for Acct-Tunnel-Connection Length >= 3 String The format of the identifier represented by the String field depends upon the value of the Tunnel-Type attribute [3]. For example, to fully identify an L2TP tunnel connection, the L2TP Tunnel ID and Call ID might be encoded in this field. The exact encoding of this field is implementation dependent.4.2. Acct-Tunnel-Packets-Lost Description This Attribute indicates the number of packets lost on a given link. It SHOULD be included in Accounting-Request packets which contain an Acct-Status-Type attribute having the value Tunnel-Link-Stop.Zorn, et al. Informational [Page 7]RFC 2867 RADIUS Tunnel Accounting Support June 2000 A summary of the Acct-Tunnel-Packets-Lost Attribute format is shown below. The fields are transmitted from left to right. 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | Length | Lost +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Lost (cont) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Type 86 for Acct-Tunnel-Packets-Lost Length 6 Lost The Lost field is 4 octets in length and represents the number of packets lost on the link.5. Table of Attributes The following table provides a guide to which attributes may be found in Accounting-Request packets. No tunnel attributes should be found in Accounting-Response packets. Request # Attribute 0-1 64 Tunnel-Type 0-1 65 Tunnel-Medium-Type 0-1 66 Tunnel-Client-Endpoint 0-1 67 Tunnel-Server-Endpoint 0-1 68 Acct-Tunnel-Connection 0 69 Tunnel-Password 0-1 81 Tunnel-Private-Group-ID 0-1 82 Tunnel-Assignment-ID 0 83 Tunnel-Preference 0-1 86 Acct-Tunnel-Packets-LostZorn, et al. Informational [Page 8]RFC 2867 RADIUS Tunnel Accounting Support June 2000 The following table defines the meaning of the above table entries. 0 This attribute MUST NOT be present in packet. 0+ Zero or more instances of this attribute MAY be present in packet. 0-1 Zero or one instance of this attribute MAY be present in packet.6. Security Considerations By "sniffing" RADIUS Accounting packets, it might be possible for an eavesdropper to perform a passive analysis of tunnel connections.7. References [1] Rigney, C., "RADIUS Accounting", RFC 2866, June 2000. [2] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [3] Zorn, G., Leifer, D., Rubens, A., Shriver, J., Holdrege, M. and I. Goyret, "RADIUS Attributes for Tunnel Protocol Support", RFC 2868, June 2000. [4] Townsley, W., Valencia, A., Rubens, A., Pall, G., Zorn, G. and B. Palter, "Layer Two Tunneling Protocol "L2TP"", RFC 2661, August 1999. [5] Hamzeh, K., Pall, G., Verthein, W., Taarud, J., Little, W. and G. Zorn, "Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol (PPTP)", RFC 2637, July 1999.8. Acknowledgments Thanks to Aydin Edguer, Ly Loi, Matt Holdrege and Gurdeep Singh Pall for salient input and review.Zorn, et al. Informational [Page 9]RFC 2867 RADIUS Tunnel Accounting Support June 20009. Authors' Addresses Questions about this memo can be directed to: Glen Zorn Cisco Systems, Inc. 500 108th Avenue N.E., Suite 500 Bellevue, Washington 98004 USA Phone: +1 425 438 8218 FAX: +1 425 438 1848 EMail: gwz@cisco.com Dave Mitton Nortel Networks 880 Technology Park Drive Billerica, MA 01821 Phone: +1 978 288 4570 Fax: +1 978 288 3030 EMail: dmitton@nortelnetworks.com Bernard Aboba Microsoft Corporation One Microsoft Way Redmond, Washington 98052 Phone: +1 425 936 6605 Fax: +1 425 936 7329 EMail: aboba@internaut.comZorn, et al. Informational [Page 10]RFC 2867 RADIUS Tunnel Accounting Support June 200010. Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). All Rights Reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.Acknowledgement Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society.Zorn, et al. Informational [Page 11]
⌨️ 快捷键说明
复制代码
Ctrl + C
搜索代码
Ctrl + F
全屏模式
F11
切换主题
Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键
?
增大字号
Ctrl + =
减小字号
Ctrl + -