rfc4849.txt

使用最广泛的radius的linux的源码

   When translating Diameter NAS-Filter-Rule AVPs to RADIUS NAS-Filter-
   Rule attributes, the set of NAS-Filter-Rule attributes is created by
   concatenating the individual filter rules, separated by a NUL octet.
   The resulting data SHOULD then be split on 253-octet boundaries.

   When translating RADIUS NAS-Filter-Rule attributes to Diameter NAS-
   Filter-Rule AVPs, the individual rules are determined by
   concatenating the contents of all NAS-Filter-Rule attributes, and
   then splitting individual filter rules with the NUL octet as a
   delimiter.  Each rule is then encoded as a single Diameter NAS-
   Filter-Rule AVP.

   Note that a translated Diameter message can be larger than the
   maximum RADIUS packet size (4096 bytes).  Where a Diameter/RADIUS
   gateway receives a Diameter message containing a NAS-Filter-Rule AVP
   that is too large to fit into a RADIUS packet, the Diameter/RADIUS
   gateway will respond to the originating Diameter peer with a Result-
   Code AVP with the value DIAMETER_RADIUS_AVP_UNTRANSLATABLE (5018),
   and with a Failed-AVP AVP containing the NAS-Filter-Rule AVP.  Since
   repairing the error will probably require re-working the filter
   rules, the originating peer should treat the combination of a
   Result-Code AVP with value DIAMETER_RADIUS_AVP_UNTRANSLATABLE and a
   Failed-AVP AVP containing a NAS-Filter-Rule AVP as a terminal error.



Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 5]

RFC 4849                 Filter Rule Attribute                April 2007


5.  IANA Considerations

   This specification does not create any new registries.

   This document uses the RADIUS [RFC2865] namespace, see
   <http://www.iana.org/assignments/radius-types>.  One value has been
   allocated in the section "RADIUS Attribute Types".  The RADIUS
   attribute for which a value has been assigned is:

      92 - NAS-Filter-Rule

   This document also utilizes the Diameter [RFC3588] namespace.  A
   Diameter Result-Code AVP value for the
   DIAMETER_RADIUS_AVP_UNTRANSLATABLE error has been allocated.  Since
   this is a permanent failure, the allocation (5018) is in the 5xxx
   range.

6.  Security Considerations

   This specification describes the use of RADIUS for purposes of
   authentication, authorization and accounting.  Threats and security
   issues for this application are described in [RFC3579] and [RFC3580];
   security issues encountered in roaming are described in [RFC2607].

   This document specifies a new attribute that can be included in
   existing RADIUS packets, which are protected as described in
   [RFC3579] and [RFC3576].  See those documents for a more detailed
   description.

   The security mechanisms supported in RADIUS and Diameter are focused
   on preventing an attacker from spoofing packets or modifying packets
   in transit.  They do not prevent an authorized RADIUS/Diameter server
   or proxy from modifying, inserting, or removing attributes with
   malicious intent.  Filter attributes modified or removed by a
   RADIUS/Diameter proxy may enable a user to obtain network access
   without the appropriate filters; if the proxy were also to modify
   accounting packets, then the modification would not be reflected in
   the accounting server logs.

   Since the RADIUS protocol currently does not support capability
   negotiation, a RADIUS server cannot automatically discover whether a
   NAS supports the NAS-Filter-Rule attribute.  A legacy NAS not
   compliant with this specification may silently discard the NAS-
   Filter-Rule attribute while permitting the user to access the
   network.  This can cause users to improperly receive unfiltered
   access to the network.  As a result, the NAS-Filter-Rule attribute
   SHOULD only be sent to a NAS that is known to support it.




Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 6]

RFC 4849                 Filter Rule Attribute                April 2007


7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March, 1997.

   [RFC2865] Rigney, C., Willens, S., Rubens, A., and W. Simpson,
             "Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", RFC
             2865, June 2000.

   [RFC3588] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J.
             Arkko, "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003.

   [RFC4005] Calhoun, P., Zorn, G., Spence, D., and D. Mitton, "Diameter
             Network Access Server Application", RFC 4005, August 2005.

7.2.  Informative References

   [RFC2607] Aboba, B. and J. Vollbrecht, "Proxy Chaining and Policy
             Implementation in Roaming", RFC 2607, June 1999.

   [RFC3576] Chiba, M., Dommety, G., Eklund, M., Mitton, D., and B.
             Aboba, "Dynamic Authorization Extensions to Remote
             Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", RFC 3576,
             July 2003.

   [RFC3579] Aboba, B. and P. Calhoun, "RADIUS (Remote Authentication
             Dial In User Service) Support For Extensible Authentication
             Protocol (EAP)", RFC 3579, September 2003.

   [RFC3580] Congdon, P., Aboba, B., Smith, A., Zorn, G., and J. Roese,
             "IEEE 802.1X Remote Authentication Dial In User Service
             (RADIUS) Usage Guidelines", RFC 3580, September 2003.

   [Traffic] Congdon, P., Sanchez, M., Lior, A., Adrangi, F., and B.
             Aboba, "RADIUS Attributes for Filtering and Redirection",
             Work in Progress, March 2007.

8.  Acknowledgments

   The authors would like to acknowledge Emile Bergen, Alan DeKok, Greg
   Weber, Glen Zorn, Pasi Eronen, David Mitton, and David Nelson for
   contributions to this document.







Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 7]

RFC 4849                 Filter Rule Attribute                April 2007


Authors' Addresses

   Paul Congdon
   Hewlett Packard Company
   ProCurve Networking by HP
   8000 Foothills Blvd, M/S 5662
   Roseville, CA  95747

   EMail: [e-mail]
   Phone: [phone]
   Fax:   [phone]


   Mauricio Sanchez
   Hewlett Packard Company
   ProCurve Networking by HP
   8000 Foothills Blvd, M/S 5559
   Roseville, CA  95747

   EMail: [e-mail]
   Phone: [phone]
   Fax:   [phone]


   Bernard Aboba
   Microsoft Corporation
   One Microsoft Way
   Redmond, WA 98052

   EMail: [e-mail]
   Phone: [phone]
   Fax:   [phone]



















Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 8]

RFC 4849                 Filter Rule Attribute                April 2007


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
   retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
   THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.

Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   [e-mail].

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.







Congdon, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 9]