[ietf78-tech] EDUroam connect request

[Jim Martin]

	That does seem to be the more scalable solution. 

	Paul, any objection? 

	- Jim

On Jul 8, 2010, at 11:48 AM, Rob Nagy wrote:

> If they just want it for this meeting I would vote that we proxy and skip the additional SSID. Less headache in my opinion. 
> 
> Alice aka Rob
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Jul 8, 2010, at 11:44 AM, Chris Elliott <chelliot at pobox.com> wrote:
> 
>> If we use another SSID then we won't need to proxy the requests. Not that I'm a fan of additional ssid's either.
>> 
>> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Rob Nagy <rob at deepdivenetworking.com> wrote:
>> I agree as a nice to do. We should be able to radius proxy by realm for people who want to use eduroam credentials. The issue we couldn't probably port to Beijing is that I don't believe we could limit devices per user with a radius proxy realm(have to double check). But for this meeting it should be a fairly easy endeavor, time allowing.
>> 
>> I will do additional research in how we could do it with freeradius.
>> 
>> Rob
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> On Jul 8, 2010, at 11:19 AM, joel jaeggli <joelja at bogus.com> wrote:
>> 
>> > This sort of dovetails with my observation about using open-id auth as
>> > an option for the portal...
>> >
>> > personally I'm adverse to simply creating more ssids, but not adverse to
>> > the idea of enabling authentication against additional systems.
>> >
>> > On 2010-07-08 08:06, Jim Martin wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Jul 8, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Geert Jan de Groot wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> It's not my call to make, I'm not sure if the 1252's
>> >>> can handle the additional config (but should, yes?),
>> >>> and I promised I'd forward the request to the list to see what you think?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>    I'd like to put this on the "Nice to do" list....
>> >>
>> >>    That is, if we have cycles and find that we can do it (logistically and technically), then it's a good thing to do.
>> >>
>> >>    However, if we're slammed or it hits any snags, it will be delayed or dropped.
>> >>
>> >>    Paul, are you ok with that?
>> >>
>> >>    On the technical side, would we have a separate (offsite) radius server configured for that one SSID, or would we relay the request (based upon realm or something) from our radius server to theirs?
>> >>
>> >>    - Jim
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> ietf78-tech mailing list
>> >> ietf78-tech at daedelus.com
>> >> http://www.daedelus.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf78-tech
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > ietf78-tech mailing list
>> > ietf78-tech at daedelus.com
>> > http://www.daedelus.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf78-tech
>> _______________________________________________
>> ietf78-tech mailing list
>> ietf78-tech at daedelus.com
>> http://www.daedelus.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf78-tech
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Chris Elliott
>> chelliot at pobox.com
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> ietf78-tech mailing list
> ietf78-tech at daedelus.com
> http://www.daedelus.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf78-tech

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.daedelus.com/pipermail/ietf78-tech/attachments/20100708/c26bc592/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3675 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.daedelus.com/pipermail/ietf78-tech/attachments/20100708/c26bc592/attachment.bin