<?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-08" 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-08"/>
    <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="27"/>
    <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="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="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="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="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="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="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>
