On Mar 1, 2013, at 7:15 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> "Jim" == Jim Schaad writes:
>>> There doesn't seem to be a way for a server to request channel
>>> binding. If that's true we should probably add the following:
>>> Since a server cannot indicate a desire for channel binding,
>>> clients th
> "Joseph" == Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) writes:
[Joe] THis is a reasonable request. We'll need to make sure there is no
ambiguity in the use of the empty message. Should this be covered in RFC
6677?
RFC 6677 doesn't talk about how you decide you're going to do channel
binding. I had m
> -Original Message-
> From: Sam Hartman [mailto:hartmans-i...@mit.edu]
> Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 6:19 PM
> To: Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)
> Cc: Sam Hartman; Jim Schaad;
> Subject: Re: [Emu] Comments on draft-ietf-emu-eap-tunnel-method
>
> > "Joseph" == Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)
I have been doing my best not to send this message but it has finally
slipped out.
I keep wondering if we need to do something much more explicit in terms of
both identifying and purposing the certificates that are being used for this
method.
Question #1 - Do we expect that the client certi
