On Nov 30, 2022, at 1:24 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
> I'd also like to take some time to consider what additional TLVs may be
> required. Right now there is an incongruence between TEAP and other
> protocols that sign certs in that there is no CSR attributes TLV. There may
> be several others to c
Hello,
On Tue, 29 Nov 2022, at 22:34, Alan DeKok wrote:
> Based on interoperability testing, it looks like implementations
> followed EAP-FAST for derivation of the MS-MPPE keys, and not RFC 7170:
>
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/hostap/2022-July/040639.html
>
> http://lists.infradead.org
On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 03:01:08PM +, Alexander Clouter wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Nov 2022, at 22:34, Alan DeKok wrote:
> > Based on interoperability testing, it looks like implementations
> > followed EAP-FAST for derivation of the MS-MPPE keys, and not RFC 7170:
> EAP-FAST almost does not documen
I also think option 3 is the preferred one at this point, given the
interoperable implementations that have already shipped. In addition to Cisco
ISE, the Windows TEAP implementation has also been validated against Aruba
ClearPass.
The person who implemented the Windows client code is no longer
The minutes from the IETF 115 EMU session have been published at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/115/materials/minutes-115-emu-202211071
530-00.
Thanks so much to Janfred Rieckers for the in-meeting notetaking. It's
greatly appreciated and crucial to a successful meeting.
Cheers,
Pete
It sounds like we are gaining consensus to create a revision of TEAP. The
emphasis would be (in priority order):
- Aligning specification with current implementations
- Clarifying the existing specification
- Adding missing TLVs to make existing use cases work better
The goal is to get
No, but I would ask that we still have an interim to close the errata.
Eliot
On 01.12.22 06:22, Joseph Salowey wrote:
It sounds like we are gaining consensus to create a revision of TEAP.
The emphasis would be (in priority order):
* Aligning specification with current implementations
* C