TNC Fragmentation ACKs [diff included]
Sun Feb 14 08:10:28 PST 2010
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 08:18:29PM +0100, arne.welzel at stud.fh-hannover.de wrote:
> Found the following Internet Draft  which defines PT-EAP and at the
> same time EAP-TNC. (?)
> PT-EAP: Posture Transport (PT) Protocol For EAP Tunnel Methods
> The fragmentation part is more verbose than in the IF-T specification:
> A party that receives an EAP-TNC message with the M flag set MUST
> respond with an EAP-TNC Acknowledgement message: an EAP-TNC message
> with no Data and with the L, M, and S flags set to 0. The party that
> sent an EAP-TNC message with the M flag set MUST wait for the
> EAP-TNC Acknowledgement packet before sending the next fragment.
> This would clear things up?
Yes, that is good enough for me (though, it does actually still leave it
implicit by only mentioned L/M/S flags and not whether the Flags|Ver
field is actually included). I changed wpa_supplicant and hostapd to
include the Flags|Ver field in the ack frame.
Jouni Malinen PGP id EFC895FA
More information about the Hostap