I support publication.
Section 4:
One minor error:
fully mitigate the risk of NAS impersonation when these mechanisms
are used, it is RECOMMENDED that mutual channel bindings be used to
bind the authentications together as described in
[I-D.ietf-emu-crypto-bind]. When doing channel binding it is
REQUIRED that the authenticator is not able to modify the channel
binding data passed between the peer to the authenticator as
part of
the authentication process.
Don't you mean cryptographic binding there?
I also believe that a reference to RFC 6919 section 1 MAY WISH TO be
considered for section 1.1. There are a lot of MUSTs is section 2. I
don't support any text changes to section 2.
_______________________________________________
abfab mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab
