RE: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method

2007-10-25 Thread Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)
> -Original Message- > From: Pascal Urien [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 6:52 AM > To: Joseph Salowey (jsalowey); emu@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method > > Hi Joe, > >I support m

Re: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method

2007-10-24 Thread Pascal Urien
Hi Joe, I support method 2, with the following remarks Under VISTA i have found three tunnels methods already supported, PEAP, EAP-FAST, TTLS. PEAP and TTLS are drafts with multiple versions. EAP-FAST is an RFC All these methods use two phases, phase 1 and phase 2 Phase 1 coding (e.

RE: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method

2007-10-04 Thread Nancy Winget (ncamwing)
: RE: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method I favor option 2. There are tunneling EAP methods already in widespread use that can meet the requirements with a few extensions (e.g. EAP-TTLSv0 with the extensions documented in draft-hanna-eap-ttls-agility-00.txt). Customers are

Re: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method

2007-10-04 Thread Alan DeKok
Stephen Hanna wrote: > I favor option 2. As do I. Alan DeKok. ___ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu

RE: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method

2007-10-03 Thread Hao Zhou (hzhou)
ctober 03, 2007 7:16 PM > To: Ray Bell; Stephen Hanna; Joseph Salowey (jsalowey); emu@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method > > I also favor #2, I like Steve have found customers reluctant > to deploy new methods if we can satisfy the goals with a

RE: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method

2007-10-03 Thread Ryan Hurst
ECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 3:26 PM To: 'Stephen Hanna'; 'Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)'; emu@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method I favor option 2 as well Ray -Original Message- From: Stephen Hanna [mailto:[EMAIL PR

RE: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method

2007-10-03 Thread Ray Bell
I favor option 2 as well Ray -Original Message- From: Stephen Hanna [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 12:55 PM To: Joseph Salowey (jsalowey); emu@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method I favor option 2. There are tunneling

RE: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method

2007-10-03 Thread Gene Chang (genchang)
TECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 3:55 PM > To: Joseph Salowey (jsalowey); emu@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method > > I favor option 2. > > There are tunneling EAP methods already in widespread use that can meet > the requireme

RE: [Emu] Moving forward with the EMU password method

2007-10-03 Thread Stephen Hanna
I favor option 2. There are tunneling EAP methods already in widespread use that can meet the requirements with a few extensions (e.g. EAP-TTLSv0 with the extensions documented in draft-hanna-eap-ttls-agility-00.txt). Customers are understandably reluctant to deploy new EAP methods so it's much mo