Subject: RE: Review of draft-ietf-radext-tcp-transport (Part III)

From: "Bernard Aboba" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 17:12:30 -0800

Additional comments

I am wondering whether this document should take a position on the
recommendations described in [RFC3539] Section 3, particularly:

3.2.  Use of Nagle Algorithm

3.3.  Multiple Connections

3.4.2 Primary/Secondary failover

3.4.3 Connection Load Balancing

3.6 Invalidation of Transport Parameter Estimates

3.7 Inability to Use Fast Retransmit

3.8 Head of Line Blocking

3.9 Congestion Avoidance

3.10 Premature Failover

---

From: Alan DeKok <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 11:43:52 +0100

> 3.8 Head of Line Blocking

  There's already a "catch-all" sentence in the doc:

The guidelines defined in [RFC3539] for implementing a AAA protocol
over reliable transport are applicable to RADIUS over TLS/TCP.

  I think that should be fine.  I don't want to reproduce 3539 here, or
do a section-by-section review, saying "this applies, too".

  Alan DeKok.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>