Dan Harkins wrote: > 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.
Discussing the applicability, cost, benefit, etc. of EAP-FAST is a good idea. Re-visiting its architectural choices isn't something we have time for. Alan DeKok. _______________________________________________ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
