Hi Alan, On Sun, January 25, 2009 12:37 am, Alan DeKok wrote: > Chris Hessing wrote: >> I apologize if this has been hashed out before, but looking at the list >> archives I couldn't see anywhere it had. > > There have been hallway discussions about some of these issues, but > little on this list. EAP-FAST has been published as RFC 4851, and > revisiting it is not currently a charter item. > > That being said, some discussion on this list is fine if it doesn't > distract from charter requirements.
A tunnel method is definitely in our charter and we have had much discussion on what that would look like. If you re-read the notes from IETF 71 there was a long discussion about choosing an existing one to update and not necessarily rolling a new one from scratch. The candidates sure seem to be TTLS and FAST, given the presentations on them we've had. So I think a discussion about issues with either one of the potential candidates is valuable and can help the WG in our choice. regards, Dan. _______________________________________________ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
