Re: [Emu] Appropriate AAA/EAP response to a peer's NAK when there are no overlapping methods

2020-08-23 Thread Mohit Sethi M
Hi Alan, On 8/21/20 3:50 PM, Alan DeKok wrote: > On Aug 21, 2020, at 3:27 AM, Mohit Sethi M > wrote: >> Sorry for nitpicking here. But it is important to distinguish the two >> components that comprise a AAA server: RADIUS server and EAP server. RFC >> 3579 briefly alludes to this difference and

Re: [Emu] Appropriate AAA/EAP response to a peer's NAK when there are no overlapping methods

2020-08-23 Thread Alan DeKok
On Aug 23, 2020, at 9:48 AM, Mohit Sethi M wrote: > Sorry, but you are missing context here. The discussion was no longer > about sending an EAP failure when no suitable EAP methods are available. > Terry and I were discussing the direction of NAK messages in an EAP > conversation. I highlighte

Re: [Emu] Appropriate AAA/EAP response to a peer's NAK when there are no overlapping methods

2020-08-23 Thread Mohit Sethi M
Hi again, On 8/23/20 7:12 PM, Alan DeKok wrote: > On Aug 23, 2020, at 9:48 AM, Mohit Sethi M wrote: >> Sorry, but you are missing context here. The discussion was no longer >> about sending an EAP failure when no suitable EAP methods are available. >> Terry and I were discussing the direction of

Re: [Emu] Appropriate AAA/EAP response to a peer's NAK when there are no overlapping methods

2020-08-23 Thread Alan DeKok
On Aug 23, 2020, at 12:52 PM, Mohit Sethi M wrote: > Well. I am referring to the text from the RFC 3579: "In order to avoid > retransmissions by the peer, the Access-Reject SHOULD include an > EAP-Response/Nak packet indicating no preferred method, encapsulated > within EAP-Message attribute(s)