Alan DeKok <al...@deployingradius.com> wrote:
> However, the situation is more difficult if the EAP supplicant signals
> an NAI for an EAP method which is supported by the peer, but which
> contains a provisioning method which the peer does not support. The
> normal EAP NAK signalling allows selection only of a different EAP
> method, but offers no way to signal that a different provisioning
> method should be used.
Can you give me an example of foo@ vs bar@ which would both be under
eap.arpa?
The I-D mentioned in the subject line is bootstrapped-tls, and it uses
tls-pok-dpp.eap.arpa.
I don't think that there are any options other than anonymous@ or
empty-string.
Maybe the subject line has drifted though, and this is abour eap-arpa?
por...@tls.eap.arpa is defined, but no other usernames seem valid.
So I'm perplexed by this email.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Emu mailing list -- emu@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to emu-le...@ietf.org
