Alan DeKok [mailto:[email protected]] writes:
> Glen Zorn wrote: > > Alan DeKok [mailto:[email protected]] writes: > >> 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. > > > > In other words, no technical review. OK, great, how about we just > let the > > Cisco & Juniper marketing departments slug it out & let us know who > wins? > > A technical review of EAP-FAST as it applies to the charter work > items > is relevant. Thanks for the clarification. However, it's hard for me to understand how the architectural choices of EAP-FAST could be irrelevant to the charter work items. > This WG is also a reasonable place to discuss the status > of the current EAP-FAST document. However, re-designing EAP-FAST is > not > on the charter of this WG. OK, great. Just out of curiosity, though, would you mind explaining the criteria upon which these policies are based since EAP-FAST is not specifically mentioned anywhere in the charter? > > Alan DeKok. _______________________________________________ Emu mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
