[Joe] Jari had asked to keep this open to TLS.  I think he was
suggesting it could be done as a TLS extension and would not require
tunneling.  I agree that we do not want to extend EAP-TLS to do
tunneling. 

How about:

"- Enable a TLS-based EAP method to support channel bindings. This item
will not generate a new method, rather it will focus on supporting EAP 
channel bindings within the tunnel method.  The possiblity of adding
channel bindings to EAP-TLS through a TLS extension or other standard
TLS mechanism may also be investigated. " 

[BA] I think we only want one mechanism for support of channel bindings
in TLS-based methods.  So it's ok to investigate a TLS extension vs.
other mechanisms for supporting channel bindings, but I'd suggest we
only want to choose one path.  So my suggestion would be to modify
the text as follows:

- Enable a TLS-based EAP method to support channel bindings.  This item
will not generate a new method, rather it will focus on adding support for
EAP channel bindings.  Potential mechanisms for addition of support for
channel bindings will be investigated, including tunneling of channel
binding parameters, or a TLS extension or other standard TLS mechanism."   
 

_______________________________________________
Emu mailing list
Emu@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu

Reply via email to