There have been several reviews of different aspects of this draft in the past:
Jim provided a complete review here:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emu/ZDwpgyOL5eBPgyOGwXqxj1VhX-4
A discussion about the L-bit and fragmentation here:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emu/ZexFr7GROnvNO
The EMU WG has placed draft-dekok-emu-eap-session-id in state
Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Mohit Sethi)
The document is available at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dekok-emu-eap-session-id/
Comment:
This is a relatively straight-forward document that addresses an important
In addition to my previous comment on this draft:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emu/eJ_xCqn7Eq2fzx6tuDS0PDdBwkI
I think that the title should be made more explicit to something along the
lines: Session-Id derivation for EAP-SIM, EAP-AKA and EAP-PEAP.
--Mohit
On 7/3/19 2:35 PM, IETF Sec
Hi all!
I have updated the EAP-NOOB draft. Here is a summary of the changes:
* The major change was to add a separate request-response pair for
communicating the PeerId and peer state to the server, instead of overloading
the NAI. This is in conformance with RFC 3748 section 5.1: the NAI is
Yes, the new Realm assigned in the Initial Exchange should be used already
during the Waiting Exchange and Completion Exchange. As part of the editorial
improvements in draft-06, I edited the specification to be clearer on this
point.
The reason is better compatibility with roaming implementat
I support adoption. I do not have any more comments at the moment, but I will
review the next version.
Good that this draft is moving forward. Now that RFC5448bis and EAP-TLS 1.3 are
past WGLC it would be good if we could have some more discussion regarding the
other two drafts concerning TLS-b
