gt;
>>>> Thanks for the input.
>>>>
>>>> For the authors,
>>>>
>>>> Does this need to be documented as a mode of operation for TEAP or are
>>>> we
>>>> going to say that this is not a supported mode?
>>>>
> To: Jim Schaad
> Cc: Stefan Winter;
> Subject: Re: [Emu] Client Auth with TLS
>
>
> On Oct 9, 2012, at 9:35 AM, Jim Schaad wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) [mailto:jsalo...@cisco.com]
>
On Oct 9, 2012, at 9:35 AM, Jim Schaad wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) [mailto:jsalo...@cisco.com]
>> Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 9:23 PM
>> To: Jim Schaad
>> Cc: Stefan Winter;
>> Subject: Re: [Emu]
> -Original Message-
> From: Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) [mailto:jsalo...@cisco.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 9:23 PM
> To: Jim Schaad
> Cc: Stefan Winter;
> Subject: Re: [Emu] Client Auth with TLS
>
> I think it is worthwhile to support an mode of oper
8:43 PM, Jim Schaad wrote:
>>
>>> Stefan,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the input.
>>>
>>> For the authors,
>>>
>>> Does this need to be documented as a mode of operation for TEAP or are
>>>we
>>> going to say that this i
t;>> From: emu-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:emu-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>>> Stefan Winter
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 11:10 PM
>>> To: emu@ietf.org
>>> Subject: Re: [Emu] Client Auth with TLS
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
&g
Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) wrote:
> I think it is worthwhile to support an mode of operation that supports peer
> privacy. I've seen this implemented in tunnel methods in two different
> ways. One with renegotiation as described below and the other as an inner
> EAP-TLS exchange after an anony
mailto:emu-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>> Stefan Winter
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 11:10 PM
>> To: emu@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [Emu] Client Auth with TLS
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> 3. The client provides the certificate in a protected manner
an Winter
> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 11:10 PM
> To: emu@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Emu] Client Auth with TLS
>
> Hi,
>
> > 3. The client provides the certificate in a protected manner - I had
> > a problem at this point because I don't know enough TLS to
Hi,
> 3. The client provides the certificate in a protected manner - I had a
> problem at this point because I don't know enough TLS to properly go through
> this scenario, and I could not really read documents while driving. If the
> encrypted certificate extension was used, then there is no is
This issue is one that I was dealing with while driving grapes back from the
vineyard yesterday. I don't know that it needs to have any changes in the
draft. I am putting this out to see if there is any controversy on the
decisions that I would make about this issue.
The client is going to use c
11 matches
Mail list logo
