This issue came up during the last IETF meeting when the WG discussed channel binding.
Pasi said the discussion was within the scope of EMU WG charter. - A document that defines EAP channel bindings and provides guidance for establishing EAP channel bindings within EAP methods. - A mechanism to support extensible communication within a TLS protected tunnel. I'm not against this. But let's face it, this is venturing into dealing with authorization parameters with EAP (EAP layer? EAP method layer? Etc.) I'm not against that either. In fact, I know there are a lot of people who'd be happy to see that happen. So, my question is, is this what we are doing: Enabling EAP to exchange authorization parameters among the EAP peer - authenticator - authentication server? If not, I hope someone can explain how this is different than what it takes to solve channel binding problem. Thanks. Alper
_______________________________________________ Emu mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
