On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 03:45:44PM -0700, Bernard Aboba wrote: > I would agree that "versioning" is not a good idea. However, as I > understand it, EAP-TTLSv0 is the only deployed version of TTLS; v1 has > never been implemented. So currently there is no versioning issue with > TTLS, and if possible, it would be best if the IETF would not create such a > problem.
I'm aware of at least one, though maybe partial, implementation of TTLSv1. Anyway, I don't think it has been deployed anywhere. > It is not clear to me that EAP-TTLS needs "versioning" in order to enable > addition of new features in a backwards compatible way, since it already > supports a TLV-based extension mechanism. If this can be done in backwards compatible way, staying with the v0 sounds reasonable assuming features from TTLSv1 are not desired and I don't think would necessarily like to mandate TLS/IA support for the method to be standardized. In general, the PEAP version negotiation itself works fine, but one of the problems is that number of different implementations _within_ the same version number work differently.. The main issue for me from the implementation view point has been lack of clear description of the protocol and existance of differently behaving and already deployed implementations.. EAP-TTLSv0 is in better situation from the viewpoint of most implementation behaving more or less in the same way. However, this can get interesting if new extensions are added and if some of the implementations are not exactly prepared for this. -- Jouni Malinen PGP id EFC895FA _______________________________________________ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
