RFC 5209: Network Endpoint Assessment (NEA): Overview and Requirements
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document defines the problem statement, scope, and protocol requirements between the components of the NEA (Network Endpoint Assessment) reference model. NEA provides owners of networks (e.g., an enterprise offering remote access) a mechanism to evaluate the posture of a system. This may take place during the request for network access and/or subsequently at any time while connected to the network. The learned posture information can then be applied to a variety of compliance-oriented decisions. The posture information is frequently useful for detecting systems that are lacking or have out-of-date security protection mechanisms such as: anti-virus and host-based firewall software. In order to provide context for the requirements, a reference model and terminology are introduced. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC5209
- Published
- June 2008
- Authors
- P. Sangster; H. Khosravi; M. Mani; K. Narayan; J. Tardo
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- sec
- Pages
- 53
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 7199Location Configuration Extensions for Policy ManagementCurrent
April 2014
- RFC 7844Anonymity Profiles for DHCP ClientsCurrent
May 2016
- RFC 9680Antitrust Guidelines for IETF ParticipantsCurrent
October 2024
- RFC 5246The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2Obsoleted
August 2008
- RFC 4366Transport Layer Security (TLS) ExtensionsObsoleted
April 2006
- RFC 6071IP Security (IPsec) and Internet Key Exchange (IKE) Document RoadmapCurrent
February 2011
- RFC 6813The Network Endpoint Assessment (NEA) Asokan Attack AnalysisCurrent
December 2012
- RFC 3546Transport Layer Security (TLS) ExtensionsObsoleted
June 2003
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?