I remember someone in Hokey WG meeting mentioned that not all methods
generate EMSK (even though they generate MSK). Is that accurate?
Despite this RFC 3748 text?
In order to provide keying material for use in a
subsequently negotiated ciphersuite, an EAP method supporting key
derivatio
Thank you for this survey.
One question though. I couldn't find any mention of "MSK" or "EMSK" in RFC
2716. Can you tell us how to get those keys out of that spec?
Alper
> -Original Message-
> From: Bernard Aboba [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 8:44 PM
> To
This issue came up during the last IETF meeting when the WG discussed
channel binding.
Pasi said the discussion was within the scope of EMU WG charter.
- A document that defines EAP channel bindings and provides guidance
for establishing EAP channel bindings within EAP methods.
- A m
Hello,
I have a comment about use of EAP in this context.
Folks might remember the ICOS BoF held during IETF 62. Discussions at that
meeting, around that era, and since then have been always pointing to the
applicability statement of EAP and more-or-less blocking the use of EAP for
anything other
> >>>>> "Alper" == Alper Yegin writes:
>
> Alper> Was this discussed? Is there a proposal to expand the
> Alper> applicability statement of EAP now? Where do we draw the new
> Alper> line now?
>
> I've certainly been thin
On Oct 19, 2012, at 5:08 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>>>>>> "Alper" == Alper Yegin writes:
>
>Alper> Hi Sam, Please also share this discussion with EAP WG and EMU
>Alper> WG mailing lists. That's where the EAP expertise is and they
>A
>>>>>> "Alper" == Alper Yegin writes:
>
>Alper> On Oct 19, 2012, at 5:08 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
>>>>>>> "Alper" == Alper Yegin writes:
>>>
>Alper> Hi Sam, Please also share this discussion with E
