I counted five responses:

Q1: 5 yes
0 no

Q2: 3 EAP-FASTv2
2 EAP-TEAM

Katrin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Alan
> DeKok
> Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 7:55 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Emu] Consensus call on EAP Tunneled method
> 
> 
>   We had 4 responses on the list, in addition to the discussion at
IETF.
> 
> Q1: 4 yes
>     0 No
> 
> Q2: 3 EAP-FASTv2
>     1 EAP-TEAM
> 
>   The WG consensus is that EAP-FASTv2 should be the tunnel method.
> 
> Alan DeKok wrote:
> > For people who didn't attend the EMU meeting at IETF, please answer
> > the following consensus call:
> >
> > Question 1: Are you ready to make a decision on the EAP tunneled
method?
> >
> >  Please indicate Yes or No.
> >
> > Question 2: If the answer to Question 1 is "Yes", please indicate
> > support for one of the two proposed methods:
> >
> >        FASTv2
> > or
> >        EAP-Team
> >
> ...
> >   Thursday April 14.  That gives us 2 weeks, which is usual for a
> > consensus call.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Emu mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
_______________________________________________
Emu mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu

Reply via email to