<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc [
  <!ENTITY nbsp    "&#160;">
  <!ENTITY zwsp   "&#8203;">
  <!ENTITY nbhy   "&#8209;">
  <!ENTITY wj     "&#8288;">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt" ?>
<!-- generated by https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc version 1.7.21 (Ruby 2.6.10) -->
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-ietf-radext-reverse-coa-07" category="std" consensus="true" submissionType="IETF" updates="8559" tocInclude="true" sortRefs="true" symRefs="true" version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.24.0 -->
  <front>
    <title abbrev="Reverse CoA">Reverse Change-of-Authorization (CoA) in RADIUS/(D)TLS</title>
    <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-radext-reverse-coa-07"/>
    <author initials="A." surname="DeKok" fullname="Alan DeKok">
      <organization>InkBridge</organization>
      <address>
        <email>alan.dekok@inkbridge.io</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author initials="V." surname="Cargatser" fullname="Vadim Cargatser">
      <organization>Cisco</organization>
      <address>
        <email>vcargats@cisco.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2025" month="August" day="17"/>
    <area>Internet</area>
    <workgroup>RADEXT Working Group</workgroup>
    <keyword>Internet-Draft</keyword>
    <abstract>
      <?line 62?>

<t>This document defines a "reverse Change-of-Authorization (CoA)" path for RADIUS packets.  A TLS connection is normally used to forward request packets from a client to a server and to send responses from the server to the client.  This specification allows a server to send CoA request packets to the client in "reverse" down that connection, and for the client to send responses to the server.  Without this capability, it is in general impossible for a server to send CoA packets to a Network Access Server (NAS) that is located behind a firewall or NAT.  This reverse CoA functionality extends the available transport methods for CoA packets, but it does not change anything else about how CoA packets are handled.</t>
      <t>This document updates RFC8559.</t>
    </abstract>
    <note removeInRFC="true">
      <name>About This Document</name>
      <t>
        Status information for this document may be found at <eref target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-radext-reverse-coa/"/>.
      </t>
      <t>
        Discussion of this document takes place on the
        RADEXT Working Group mailing list (<eref target="mailto:radext@ietf.org"/>),
        which is archived at <eref target="https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/radext/"/>.
        Subscribe at <eref target="https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext/"/>.
      </t>
      <t>Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
        <eref target="https://github.com//radext-wg/draft-ietf-radext-reverse-coa"/>.</t>
    </note>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <?line 68?>

<section anchor="introduction">
      <name>Introduction</name>
      <t>The Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service (RADIUS) protocol <xref target="RFC2865"/> is a client-server protocol where clients send requests to servers, and servers send responses to clients.  RADIUS was extended in <xref target="RFC5176"/> to define the ability to change a user's authorization, or disconnect the user via what are generally called "Change-of-Authorization" or "CoA" packets.  In this use-case, a server which normally receives authentication requests from a client instead sends CoA requests to that client.</t>
      <t>When that inversion of roles takes place, the system sending the CoA requests is acting as a client, and the system receiving those requests is acting as a server.  In order to more clearly separate these roles, all connections between RADIUS clients and servers have historically been defined to be one way.  A client sends requests to a server, on a port which is dedicated to that role.  For RADIUS, there have been separate ports defined for authentication requests, accounting requests, and CoA requests.</t>
      <t>The initial transport protocol for all RADIUS messages was the User Datagram Protocol (UDP).  <xref target="RFC6614"/> then updated RADIUS to allow packets to be sent over the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol.  The update also removed the requirement that each type of packet use a dedicated port.  Instead, all packets (including CoA) can be be sent over a TLS connection, as discussed in <xref section="2.5" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC6614"/>:</t>
      <ul empty="true">
        <li>
          <t>Due to the use of one single TCP port for all packet types, it is
required that a RADIUS/TLS server signal which types of packets are
supported on a server to a connecting peer.  See also Section 3.4 for
a discussion of signaling.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <t>That specification, however, still required that the systems still act as client and server.  The client connects to the server, and sends only requests.  The server waits for client connections, and only sends responses.  This flow of packets is referred to as the "forward" path.</t>
      <t>The limitation of this design is that it assumes that a RADIUS client can always contact a RADIUS server.  When a RADIUS server wishes to send CoA packets to a RADIUS client, it must initiate a new connection "reverse" path to that client.  Any existing TLS connection from that client is ignored, and is not used.  Even worse, the "reverse" path can be blocked by an on-path stateful function (e.g. firewall, NAT, etc.).</t>
      <t>The design of RADIUS requires that a client must be able to reach a server. But the reverse path from server to client for CoA is only usable when both client and server share a common and open network.  In the past, many organisations which supported roaming did so via dedicated interconnections using IPSec.  This design allowed the connected parties to have a route for sending CoA packets, but the direct interconnections could be expensive to set up and maintain.  As such, a common practice is now to use RADIUS/(D)TLS.</t>
      <t>However, there is often a firewall, NAT, etc. between a client and server which blocks the reverse path for RADIUS/UDP or RADIUS/(D)TLS.  This scenario is most evident in a roaming / federated environment such as eduroam (<xref target="RFC7593"/> and <xref target="EDUROAM"/>) or OpenRoaming (<xref target="OPENROAMING"/>).  Even though <xref target="RFC8559"/> defines CoA proxying, that specification does not address the issue of NAS reachability.  In many roaming environments, there is no direct reverse path from the server to the NAS, as the NAS is not accessible from the Internet.  Even if there was a public reverse path, the chain of proxies effectively hides the location of the NAS.  Intermediate proxies can (and do) rewrite packet contents to hide NAS identities.  It is therefore in many cases impossible for a server to send a request to the NAS.</t>
      <t>These limitations can result in business losses and security problems, such as the inability to disconnect a user when their account has been terminated.</t>
      <section anchor="the-solution">
        <name>The Solution</name>
        <t>This specification solves that problem.  The solution is to simply allow CoA packets to go in "reverse" down an existing RADIUS/(D)TLS connection.  That is, when a NAS connects to a RADIUS server it normally sends request packets (Access-Request, etc.) and expects to receive response packets (Access-Accept, etc.).  This specification extends RADIUS/(D)TLS by permitting a RADIUS server to re-use an existing TLS connection to send CoA packets to the NAS, and permitting the NAS to send CoA response packets to the RADIUS server over that same connection.</t>
        <t>While this document specifically mentions RADIUS/(D)TLS, it should be possible to use the same mechanisms on RADIUS/DTLS <xref target="RFC7360"/>.  However at the time of writing this specification, no implementations exist for "reverse CoA" over RADIUS/DTLS.</t>
        <t>This mechanism does not depend on the underlying transport protocol, or interact with it.  It is therefore compatible not only with <xref target="RFC6614"/>, and <xref target="RFC7360"/>, but also with <xref target="I-D.ietf-radext-radiusdtls-bis"/> which will replace those earlier standards.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="limitations">
        <name>Limitations</name>
        <t>This mechanism is not applicable for RADIUS/UDP, as  <xref target="RFC5176"/> and <xref target="RFC8559"/> are sufficient for CoA for the cases where the client and server can communicate directly.</t>
        <t>When the client and server cannot communicate directly, such as when a they are separated by a firewall or NAT, the nature of UDP makes it impossible to support reverse CoA.  Since UDP is connection-less, the server has no way of knowing whether or not the client is still receiving packets on a port.  A client may open a port, send a request, and then immediately close the port after receiving a response.  Alternatively, there could be a NAT between the client and server.  The NAT could time out its UDP state tracking, again with no indication to the server.  Therefore, any attempt by a server to use a reverse path for UDP is unlikely to work reliably.</t>
        <t>RADIUS/DTLS has similar issues to RADIUS/UDP with respect to NATs.  However, there is an underlying TLS session associated with a particular client to server connection.  So long as the TLS connection is functional, it can be used to send reverse CoA packets.  Where the TLS connection is not functional, no traffic will pass in either direction.</t>
        <t>This mechanism is also not suitable for RADIUS/TCP.  While it could theoretically be used there, RADIUS/TCP is being deprecated by <xref target="I-D.ietf-radext-deprecating-radius"/>.  As such, RADIUS/TCP is unsuitable as a transport mechanism, and no reverse CoA functionality is defined for it.</t>
        <t>For the above reasons, therefore, the "reverse CoA" functionality is limited to RADIUS/(D)TLS.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="chains-of-proxies">
        <name>Chains of Proxies</name>
        <t>There are some additional considerations which need to be addressed in order for this specification to work across multiple proxies.  While <xref target="RFC8559"/> describes CoA proxying, this specification describes how those systems can implement "reverse CoA" proxying, including processing packets through both an intermediate proxy network, and at any visited network which is not able to directly authenticate the user.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="terminology">
      <name>Terminology</name>
      <t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED",
"MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as
described in BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they
appear in all capitals, as shown here.
<?line -6?>
      </t>
      <t>Please see <xref section="1.3" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC5176"/> for the base terminology that is associated with Change-of-Authorization.</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>CoA</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul empty="true">
        <li>
          <t>Change-of-Authorization packets.  For brevity, when this document refers to "CoA" packets, it means either or both of the CoA-Request <xref section="2.2" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC5176"/> and Disconnect-Request <xref section="2.1" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC5176"/> packets.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>ACK</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul empty="true">
        <li>
          <t>Change-of-Authorization "positive acknowledgment" packets.  For brevity, when this document refers to "ACK" packets, it means either or both of CoA-ACK and Disconnect-ACK packets.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>NAK</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul empty="true">
        <li>
          <t>Change-of-Authorization "negative Acknowledgements" packets.  For brevity, when this document refers to "NAK" packets, it means either or both of CoA-NAK and Disconnect-NAK packets.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>RADIUS/TLS</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul empty="true">
        <li>
          <t>RADIUS over the Transport Layer Security protocol <xref target="RFC6614"/></t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>RADIUS/DTLS</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul empty="true">
        <li>
          <t>RADIUS over the Datagram Transport Layer Security protocol  <xref target="RFC7360"/></t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>RADIUS/(D)TLS</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul empty="true">
        <li>
          <t>RADIUS over either DTLS or TLS.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>(D)TLS</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul empty="true">
        <li>
          <t>Either RADIUS/TLS or RADIUS/DTLS.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>reverse CoA</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <ul empty="true">
        <li>
          <t>CoA, ACK, or NAK packets sent over a RADIUS/(D)TLS connection which was made from a RADIUS client to a RADIUS server.</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
    </section>
    <section anchor="concepts">
      <name>Concepts</name>
      <t>The reverse CoA functionality is based on two additions to RADIUS.  The first addition is a configuration and signaling method, to indicate that a RADIUS client is capable of accepting reverse CoA packets, which is discussed below in <xref target="signaling"/>.  The second addition is an extension to the "reverse" routing table for CoA packets that was first described in Section 2.1 of <xref target="RFC8559"/>.  This addition is discussed below in <xref target="routing"/>.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="signaling">
      <name>Capability Configuration and Signaling</name>
      <t>In order for a RADIUS server to send reverse CoA packets to a client, it must first know that the client is capable of accepting these packets.</t>
      <t>Clients and servers implementing reverse CoA MUST have a configuration flag which indicates that the other party supports the reverse CoA functionality.  That is, the client has a per-server flag enabling (or not) reverse CoA functionality.  The server has a similar per-client flag.</t>
      <t>The flag can be used where the parties are known to each other.  The flag can also be used in conjunction with dynamic discovery (<xref target="RFC7585"/>), so long as the server associates the flag with the client identity and not with any particular IP address.  That is, the flag can be associated with any method of identifying a particular client such as TLS PSK identity, information in a client certificate, etc.</t>
      <t>The configuration flag allows administrators to statically enable this functionality, based on out-of-band discussions with other administrators.  This process is best used in an environment where all RADIUS proxies are known (or required) to have a particular set of functionality, as with a roaming consortium.</t>
      <t>This specification does not define a way for clients and servers to negotiate this functionality on a per-connection basis.  The RADIUS protocol has little, if any, provisions for capability negotiations, and this specification is not the place to add that functionality.</t>
      <t>Without notification, however, it is possible for clients and servers to have mismatched configurations.  Where a client is configured to accept reverse CoA packets and the server is not configured to send them, no packets will be sent.  Where a client is configured to not accept reverse CoA packets and the server is configured to send them, the client will silently discard these packets as per <xref section="3" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC2865"/>.  In both of those situations, the reverse CoA functionality will not be available.  There may be security issues when it is not possible to disconnect users, or to change their authorization.  See <xref target="security-considerations"/> for some additional comments on this topic.</t>
      <t>Any matched configuration for reverse CoA is therefore identical to the situation before reverse CoA was defined.  The relevant issues were discussed above in <xref target="introduction"/>.</t>
      <section anchor="proxies">
        <name>Proxies</name>
        <t>As there is no RADIUS routing protocol, the administrator of a proxy is responsible for manually validating routing of packets across multiple proxies.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="connection-management">
      <name>Connection Management</name>
      <t>This specification relies entirely on a client making a (D)TLS connection to a server.  Where the client does not make a connection to the server, or where the client quickly closes connections, the reverse CoA functionality will be less useful.</t>
      <t>Where a particular client and server combination is determined to support this functionality, the server may need to send reverse CoA packets at any time.  A client which does not send watchdog packets may have its connection state discarded by a firewall or NAT.  As such, the client SHOULD maintain at least connection open to the server at all times.</t>
      <t>The application watchdog mechanism defined in <xref section="3.4" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC3539"/> SHOULD be used to maintain the connection.  The watchdog packet SHOULD be Status-Server, as defined in <xref target="RFC5997"/>.</t>
      <t>The watchdog timer (Tw) which is defined in <xref section="3.4.1" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC3539"/> SHOULD be initialized to 15 seconds, instead of the default value of 30 seconds.  A value of 30 seconds is likely to be high enough that intermediate nodes may discard connection state.  A value of 15 seconds is much less likely to result in the connection state being discarded.</t>
      <section anchor="dynamic-discovery">
        <name>Dynamic Discovery</name>
        <t>When <xref target="RFC7585"/> dynamic discovery is used, systems which need to send CoA packets to a destination can use the "aaa+dynauth" lookup that is defined in <xref section="2.1.1.1" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC7585"/>.  That process allows for systems to make (D)TLS connections directly to a destination.</t>
        <t>The reverse CoA functionality defined here is therefore useful, but is not strictly necessary when dynamic discovery is used.  However, problems arise when system needing to receive CoA packets chooses to not implement dynamic discovery for them, but instead to rely solely on the reverse CoA functionality</t>
        <t>Without dynamic discovery, the system necessarily relies instead on the reverse CoA functionality which uses the connections that it makes to servers.  If at any time the system drops its connections to a server, the server has no way to send the CoA packets.</t>
        <t>As such, it is RECOMMENDED that systems which use <xref target="RFC7585"/> for Access-Request and/or Accounting-Request packets also use the same method for CoA-Request and Disconnect-Request packets.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="routing">
      <name>Reverse Routing across Proxies</name>
      <t>In normal RADIUS proxying. the forward routing table uses the User-Name attribute (via the Network Access Identifiers (NAIs) <xref target="RFC7542"/>) to map realms to next hop servers.  For reverse CoA, <xref section="2.1" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC8559"/> uses the Operator-Name attribute to map a realm to one or more next hop servers.</t>
      <t>This specification extends the <xref section="2.1" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC8559"/> reverse routing table to allow the next hop to be found via an open (D)TLS connection, rather than a destination hostname or IP address.  A server which needs to send reverse CoA packets to clients maintains a list of open (D)TLS connections from clients.  It also associates both a reverse CoA capability, and one or more realm with each connection.</t>
      <t>A server MUST allow one realm to be associated with multiple connections.  A server MUST allow multiple realms to be associated with one connection.  That is, the "realm to connection" mapping is not one-to-one, or 1:N, or M:1, it is N:M, i.e. many-to-many.</t>
      <t>This process occurs for all on-path RADIUS proxies, except for the final one which sends the CoA packet to the client.  That proxy forwards the reverse CoA packet to the client based on the Operator-NAS-Identifier attribute (<xref section="3.4" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC8559"/>) and/or other NAS identification attributes such as NAS-Identifier, NAS-IP-Address, or NAS-IPv6-Address.  The result is that there is a complete forwarding path from the home network which authenticates the user, back to the visited network where the user is currently located.</t>
      <section anchor="errors-and-fail-over">
        <name>Errors and Fail Over</name>
        <t>This specification extends <xref section="3.2" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC8559"/> to handle the situation where the destinaion realm is known, but where there is no connection over which the request can be routed.</t>
        <t>When a receives an unexpected reverse CoA packet over a connection, it MUST be silently discarded as per <xref section="3" sectionFormat="comma" target="RFC2865"/>.  A server SHOULD log a descriptive message about this error.  This behavior is unchanged from prior specifications.</t>
        <t>When a server supports reverse CoA, and receives a reverse CoA packet which cannot be forwarded, the server MUST return a NAK packet that contains an Error-Cause Attribute having value 502 ("Request Not Routable").  The server SHOULD also log a descriptive message about this error.  Logging errors helps an administrator discover and correct any deficiencies in the server configuration, or in its interaction with other systems.</t>
        <t>As with normal proxying, a particular packet can sometimes have the choice of more than one connection which can be used to reach a destination.  In that case, issues of load-balancing, fail-over, etc. are implementation-defined, and are not discussed here.  For the purpose of this specification, when a server needs to send a reverse CoA connection to a NAS, it just chooses a connection which both supports reverse CoA, and which can route packets to the NAS.  The server then sends the CoA packet down the chosen connection.</t>
        <t>A server can also use RADIUS/UDP to send the reverse CoA packet; there is no requirement that all CoA packets use a "reversed" (D)TLS connection.</t>
        <t>After sending a packet, the server then waits for a reply, doing retransmission if necessary.  For all issues other than the connection being used, reverse CoA packets are handled as defined in <xref target="RFC5176"/> and in <xref target="RFC8559"/>.  This specification permits reverse CoA packets to be sent on what would otherwise be a client to server (D)TLS connection.  It does not change the basic functionality of proxying CoA packets.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="retransmissions">
        <name>Retransmissions</name>
        <t>Retransmissions of reverse CoA packets are handled identically to normal CoA packets.  That is, the reverse CoA functionality extends the available transport methods for CoA packets, it does not change anything else about how CoA packets are handled.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="implementation-status">
      <name>Implementation Status</name>
      <t>RFC Editor: This section may be removed before publication.</t>
      <t>This section records the status of known implementations of the
protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of
this Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in
<xref target="RFC7942"/>.  The description of implementations in this section is
intended to assist the IETF in its decision processes in
progressing drafts to RFCs.  Please note that the listing of any
individual implementation here does not imply endorsement by the
IETF.  Furthermore, no effort has been spent to verify the
information presented here that was supplied by IETF contributors.
This is not intended as, and must not be construed to be, a
catalog of available implementations or their features.  Readers
are advised to note that other implementations may exist.</t>
      <t>According to <xref target="RFC7942"/>, "this will allow reviewers and working
groups to assign due consideration to documents that have the
benefit of running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable
experimentation and feedback that have made the implemented
protocols more mature.  It is up to the individual working groups
to use this information as they see fit".</t>
      <section anchor="freeradius">
        <name>FreeRADIUS</name>
        <t>The FreeRADIUS project has implemented this specification in the
<eref target="https://github.com/FreeRADIUS/freeradius-server/blob/v3.2.x">v3.2.x</eref>
branch which is available on GitHub.  The feature is not enabled by
default, and requires a build flag <tt>WITH_COA_TUNNEL</tt> to be defined
before the new functionality is included with the software.</t>
        <t>Maturity: The implementation is at a "beta" level, but has been tested to work
with other implementations.</t>
        <t>Coverage: All of this specification is supported.</t>
        <t>Version Compatibility: Earlier versions of this specification are not supported, but the current version is supported.</t>
        <t>Licensing: GPLv2</t>
        <t>Contact Information: http://freeradius.org/</t>
        <t>Date: This information was updated May 2025.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="cisco">
        <name>Cisco</name>
        <t>Cisco supports this specification as of Cisco IOS XE Bengaluru 17.6.1 via Vendor-Specific attributes.  <eref target="https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/lan/catalyst9300/software/release/17-6/configuration_guide/sec/b_176_sec_9300_cg/configuring_radsec.pdf">reference</eref></t>
        <t>Maturity: The implementation is available in production.</t>
        <t>Coverage: All of this specification is supported.</t>
        <t>Version Compatibility: Earlier versions of this specification are not supported, but the current version is supported.</t>
        <t>Licensing: Proprietary</t>
        <t>Contact Information: http://cisco.com/</t>
        <t>Date: This information was updated October 2022.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="aruba">
        <name>Aruba</name>
        <t>Aruba documentation states that "Instant supports dynamic CoA (RFC 3576) over RadSec and the RADIUS server uses an existing TLS connection opened by the Instant AP to send the request." <eref target="https://www.arubanetworks.com/techdocs/Instant_83_WebHelp/Content/Instant_UG/Authentication/ConfiguringRadSec.htm">reference</eref></t>
        <t>Maturity: The implementation is available in production.</t>
        <t>Coverage: All of this specification is supported.</t>
        <t>Version Compatibility: Earlier versions of this specification are not supported, but the current version is supported.</t>
        <t>Licensing: Proprietary</t>
        <t>Contact Information: http://hp.com/</t>
        <t>Date: This information was updated October 2022.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="privacy-considerations">
      <name>Privacy Considerations</name>
      <t>This document does not change or add any privacy considerations over previous RADIUS specifications.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="security-considerations">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>
      <t>It can be necessary to disconnect users, or to change their authorization.  It is a security issue when these changes cannot be performed.  This specification therefore increases security by making it easier to enforce security policies across a chain of unrelated proxies.</t>
      <t>This document also increases network security by removing the requirement for non-standard "reverse" paths for CoA-Request and Disconnect-Request packets.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="iana-considerations">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <t>This document requests no action from IANA.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="acknowledgements">
      <name>Acknowledgements</name>
      <t>Thanks to Heikki Vatiainen for testing a preliminary implementation in Radiator, and for verifying interoperability with NAS equipment.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="changelog">
      <name>Changelog</name>
      <t>RFC Editor: This section may be removed before publication.</t>
      <ul spacing="normal">
        <li>
          <t>00 - taken from draft-dekok-radext-reverse-coa-01</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>01 - Bumped to avoid expiry</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>02 - Bumped to avoid expiry</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>03 - remove dynamic negotiation and cleanups</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>04 - shephards review</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>05 - tweak refs</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>06 - tweak and claify implementation section</t>
        </li>
        <li>
          <t>07 - address IESG review</t>
        </li>
      </ul>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <back>
    <references anchor="sec-combined-references">
      <name>References</name>
      <references anchor="sec-normative-references">
        <name>Normative References</name>
        <reference anchor="RFC2865">
          <front>
            <title>Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)</title>
            <author fullname="C. Rigney" initials="C." surname="Rigney"/>
            <author fullname="S. Willens" initials="S." surname="Willens"/>
            <author fullname="A. Rubens" initials="A." surname="Rubens"/>
            <author fullname="W. Simpson" initials="W." surname="Simpson"/>
            <date month="June" year="2000"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes a protocol for carrying authentication, authorization, and configuration information between a Network Access Server which desires to authenticate its links and a shared Authentication Server. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2865"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2865"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC5176">
          <front>
            <title>Dynamic Authorization Extensions to Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)</title>
            <author fullname="M. Chiba" initials="M." surname="Chiba"/>
            <author fullname="G. Dommety" initials="G." surname="Dommety"/>
            <author fullname="M. Eklund" initials="M." surname="Eklund"/>
            <author fullname="D. Mitton" initials="D." surname="Mitton"/>
            <author fullname="B. Aboba" initials="B." surname="Aboba"/>
            <date month="January" year="2008"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes a currently deployed extension to the Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS) protocol, allowing dynamic changes to a user session, as implemented by network access server products. This includes support for disconnecting users and changing authorizations applicable to a user session. This memo provides information for the Internet community.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5176"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5176"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC6614">
          <front>
            <title>Transport Layer Security (TLS) Encryption for RADIUS</title>
            <author fullname="S. Winter" initials="S." surname="Winter"/>
            <author fullname="M. McCauley" initials="M." surname="McCauley"/>
            <author fullname="S. Venaas" initials="S." surname="Venaas"/>
            <author fullname="K. Wierenga" initials="K." surname="Wierenga"/>
            <date month="May" year="2012"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document specifies a transport profile for RADIUS using Transport Layer Security (TLS) over TCP as the transport protocol. This enables dynamic trust relationships between RADIUS servers. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6614"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6614"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC7360">
          <front>
            <title>Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) as a Transport Layer for RADIUS</title>
            <author fullname="A. DeKok" initials="A." surname="DeKok"/>
            <date month="September" year="2014"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>The RADIUS protocol defined in RFC 2865 has limited support for authentication and encryption of RADIUS packets. The protocol transports data in the clear, although some parts of the packets can have obfuscated content. Packets may be replayed verbatim by an attacker, and client-server authentication is based on fixed shared secrets. This document specifies how the Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) protocol may be used as a fix for these problems. It also describes how implementations of this proposal can coexist with current RADIUS systems.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7360"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7360"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8559">
          <front>
            <title>Dynamic Authorization Proxying in the Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service (RADIUS) Protocol</title>
            <author fullname="A. DeKok" initials="A." surname="DeKok"/>
            <author fullname="J. Korhonen" initials="J." surname="Korhonen"/>
            <date month="April" year="2019"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>RFC 5176 defines Change-of-Authorization (CoA) and Disconnect Message (DM) behavior for RADIUS. RFC 5176 also suggests that proxying these messages is possible, but it does not provide guidance as to how that is done. This specification updates RFC 5176 to correct that omission for scenarios where networks use realm-based proxying as defined in RFC 7542. This specification also updates RFC 5580 to allow the Operator-Name attribute in CoA-Request and Disconnect-Request packets.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8559"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8559"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC2119">
          <front>
            <title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
            <author fullname="S. Bradner" initials="S." surname="Bradner"/>
            <date month="March" year="1997"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2119"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2119"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8174">
          <front>
            <title>Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words</title>
            <author fullname="B. Leiba" initials="B." surname="Leiba"/>
            <date month="May" year="2017"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol specifications. This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8174"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8174"/>
        </reference>
      </references>
      <references anchor="sec-informative-references">
        <name>Informative References</name>
        <reference anchor="RFC7585">
          <front>
            <title>Dynamic Peer Discovery for RADIUS/TLS and RADIUS/DTLS Based on the Network Access Identifier (NAI)</title>
            <author fullname="S. Winter" initials="S." surname="Winter"/>
            <author fullname="M. McCauley" initials="M." surname="McCauley"/>
            <date month="October" year="2015"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document specifies a means to find authoritative RADIUS servers for a given realm. It is used in conjunction with either RADIUS over Transport Layer Security (RADIUS/TLS) or RADIUS over Datagram Transport Layer Security (RADIUS/DTLS).</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7585"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7585"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC7593">
          <front>
            <title>The eduroam Architecture for Network Roaming</title>
            <author fullname="K. Wierenga" initials="K." surname="Wierenga"/>
            <author fullname="S. Winter" initials="S." surname="Winter"/>
            <author fullname="T. Wolniewicz" initials="T." surname="Wolniewicz"/>
            <date month="September" year="2015"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes the architecture of the eduroam service for federated (wireless) network access in academia. The combination of IEEE 802.1X, the Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP), and RADIUS that is used in eduroam provides a secure, scalable, and deployable service for roaming network access. The successful deployment of eduroam over the last decade in the educational sector may serve as an example for other sectors, hence this document. In particular, the initial architectural choices and selection of standards are described, along with the changes that were prompted by operational experience.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7593"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7593"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="EDUROAM" target="https://eduroam.org">
          <front>
            <title>eduroam</title>
            <author initials="" surname="eduroam" fullname="eduroam">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <date>n.d.</date>
          </front>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="OPENROAMING" target="https://wballiance.com/openroaming/">
          <front>
            <title>OpenRoaming: One global Wi-Fi network</title>
            <author initials="W. B." surname="Alliance" fullname="Wireless Broadband Alliance">
              <organization/>
            </author>
            <date>n.d.</date>
          </front>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-radext-deprecating-radius">
          <front>
            <title>Deprecating Insecure Practices in RADIUS</title>
            <author fullname="Alan DeKok" initials="A." surname="DeKok">
              <organization>InkBridge Networks</organization>
            </author>
            <date day="25" month="May" year="2025"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>   RADIUS crypto-agility was first mandated as future work by RFC 6421.
   The outcome of that work was the publication of RADIUS over TLS (RFC
   6614) and RADIUS over DTLS (RFC 7360) as experimental documents.
   Those transport protocols have been in wide-spread use for many years
   in a wide range of networks.  They have proven their utility as
   replacements for the previous UDP (RFC 2865) and TCP (RFC 6613)
   transports.  With that knowledge, the continued use of insecure
   transports for RADIUS has serious and negative implications for
   privacy and security.

   The recent publication of the "BlastRADIUS" exploit has also shown
   that RADIUS security needs to be updated.  It is no longer acceptable
   for RADIUS to rely on MD5 for security.  It is no longer acceptable
   to send device or location information in clear text across the wider
   Internet.  This document therefore deprecates many insecure practices
   in RADIUS, and mandates support for secure TLS-based transport
   layers.  We also discuss related security issues with RADIUS, and
   give recommendations for practices which increase both security and
   privacy.

              </t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-radext-deprecating-radius-06"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-radext-radiusdtls-bis">
          <front>
            <title>(Datagram) Transport Layer Security ((D)TLS) Encryption for RADIUS</title>
            <author fullname="Jan-Frederik Rieckers" initials="J." surname="Rieckers">
              <organization>Deutsches Forschungsnetz | German National Research and Education Network</organization>
            </author>
            <author fullname="Stefan Winter" initials="S." surname="Winter">
              <organization>Fondation Restena | Restena Foundation</organization>
            </author>
            <date day="20" month="July" year="2025"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>   This document specifies a transport profile for RADIUS using
   Transport Layer Security (TLS) over TCP or Datagram Transport Layer
   Security (DTLS) over UDP as the transport protocol.  This enables
   encrypting the RADIUS traffic as well as dynamic trust relationships
   between RADIUS servers.  The specification obsoletes the experimental
   specifications in RFC 6614 (RADIUS/TLS) and RFC 7360 (RADIUS/DTLS)
   and combines them in this specification.

              </t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-radext-radiusdtls-bis-08"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC3539">
          <front>
            <title>Authentication, Authorization and Accounting (AAA) Transport Profile</title>
            <author fullname="B. Aboba" initials="B." surname="Aboba"/>
            <author fullname="J. Wood" initials="J." surname="Wood"/>
            <date month="June" year="2003"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document discusses transport issues that arise within protocols for Authentication, Authorization and Accounting (AAA). It also provides recommendations on the use of transport by AAA protocols. This includes usage of standards-track RFCs as well as experimental proposals. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3539"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3539"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC5997">
          <front>
            <title>Use of Status-Server Packets in the Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS) Protocol</title>
            <author fullname="A. DeKok" initials="A." surname="DeKok"/>
            <date month="August" year="2010"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes a deployed extension to the Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS) protocol, enabling clients to query the status of a RADIUS server. This extension utilizes the Status-Server (12) Code, which was reserved for experimental use in RFC 2865. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5997"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5997"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC7542">
          <front>
            <title>The Network Access Identifier</title>
            <author fullname="A. DeKok" initials="A." surname="DeKok"/>
            <date month="May" year="2015"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>In order to provide inter-domain authentication services, it is necessary to have a standardized method that domains can use to identify each other's users. This document defines the syntax for the Network Access Identifier (NAI), the user identifier submitted by the client prior to accessing resources. This document is a revised version of RFC 4282. It addresses issues with international character sets and makes a number of other corrections to RFC 4282.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7542"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7542"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC7942">
          <front>
            <title>Improving Awareness of Running Code: The Implementation Status Section</title>
            <author fullname="Y. Sheffer" initials="Y." surname="Sheffer"/>
            <author fullname="A. Farrel" initials="A." surname="Farrel"/>
            <date month="July" year="2016"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes a simple process that allows authors of Internet-Drafts to record the status of known implementations by including an Implementation Status section. This will allow reviewers and working groups to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable experimentation and feedback that have made the implemented protocols more mature.</t>
              <t>This process is not mandatory. Authors of Internet-Drafts are encouraged to consider using the process for their documents, and working groups are invited to think about applying the process to all of their protocol specifications. This document obsoletes RFC 6982, advancing it to a Best Current Practice.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="205"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7942"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7942"/>
        </reference>
      </references>
    </references>
    <?line 348?>



  </back>
  <!-- ##markdown-source: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-->

</rfc>
