hi. The draft currently proposes the longer SASL name, but the Moonshot implementation mostly (except in one comment) uses the shorter name. Changing either the draft or the Moonshot code would not be a big deal.
I bring this up because I seem to remember some discussion of the shorter name. Advantages of the shorter name: shorter and easier to remember for configuration and debugging. Disadvantages: There have been other proposals for aes128 Kerberos enctypes. Please let me know what we want. would we be OK with eap-aes128 meaning eap-aes128-cts-hmac-sha1-96 and eap-aes128-gcm meaning the obvious thing? _______________________________________________ abfab mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab
