Alan, I think we can all agree that without the help of the market analysts measuring deployment, comparing our personal perceptions of deployment is a bit like the five blind men and the elephant.
I had the pleasure of helping to bring TTLS into the market. The industry conditions in 2003 was very different from 2005-2006. 2003 was a greenfield market so adoption of a strong EAP method was instant (especially with the then prevailing embarrassment of WEP as a protection scheme). By the time EAP-FAST arrived, EAP-FAST had to earn adoption on to its own merits. The adoption characteristic was naturally different from TTLS or PEAP. Gene ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- Eugene Chang (genchang) WNBU, Technical Leader Office: 603-559-2978 Mobile: 781-799-0233 -----Original Message----- From: Alan DeKok [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 10:57 AM To: Gene Chang (genchang) Cc: Nancy Winget (ncamwing); Ryan Hurst; emu@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Emu] Crypto-binding in TTLS-v0 Gene Chang (genchang) wrote: > It is not unusual for developers to be unaware of the breath of the > EAP-FAST market adoption. It has been growing under the radar for a lot > of people since market research firms do not track market share of > different EAP methods. I do rather a bit more than just development. I work with people deploying systems from 100 to 10M+ users. I don't see EAP-FAST being adopted. I *do* hear rumors about EAP-FAST from enterprises who have bought single source solutions. > Part of the misperception that EAP-FAST has no market presence has been > because no one has been drawing attention to the adoption success of > EAP-FAST. I am hoping to assemble some public data to shed a light on > the secret life of EAP-FAST. People haven't drawn attention to the adoption success of PEAP or TTLS, either. Instead, people just deployed it in large numbers. I started hearing about PEAP and TTLS almost as soon as they were proposed. There was quick and immediate demand for both protocols from a wide range of systems (small, medium, large). I've seen nothing similar happen with EAP-FAST (so far). Part of the misperception that EAP-FAST has a large market presence has been that the people who are deploying it don't talk to the people *not* deploying it, and vice versa. Within the EAP-FAST camp, it looks like there's wide-spread adoption. Outside of it, it just doesn't come up in any conversation. Alan DeKok. _______________________________________________ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
