I have read emu-chbind-09.  I have no major issue on the document.
Especially I like the detailed background and general information
about channel binding in Sections 3 and 4, great work.

I have several comments.  I hope they are minor.

[1] As far as I understand, the method-based channel binding is not
applicable to ERP.  For completeness of the specification it may be
good to add some text to clarify this.

[2] While the document mentions transporting channel bindings within
the lower layer's secure association protocol for a future
alternative, it is also possible to extend EAP itself to transport
channel bindings for another future alternative as well.  I am just
wondering why the latter alternative is not mentioned in the document.

[3] Probably this was discussed in the WG, but I want to understand
the motivation for the namespace in Channel Binding Encoding because
it seems to be a hard requirement if the peer has to know what
namespace (or protocol) is being used between an EAP authenticator and
EAP server.  Also, in some case, the channel binding operation may be
performed with a standalone authenticator since, due to EAP's mode
independence property, the peer does not know whether the
authenticator it is talking to is a pass-through authenticator or a
stand-alone one.  What namespace should be used with a standalone
authenticator?

[4] The following comments are related to EAP Lower Layers Registry table:

- "PANA (no pre-authentication)" is mentioned but without a reference.
 I suggest adding a reference to RFC 5191 for this entry.

- Since there is also PANA pre-authentication (RFC 5873), I suggest
adding an entry "PANA (pre-authentication) [RFC 5873]".

- The entry for IEEE 802.11s does not make sense since
IEEE 802.11s does not support EAP authentication AFAIK.
Please check, and remove it if not needed.

- IEEE 802.16m supports EAP.  I suggest adding IEEE 802.16m.

- IEEE 802.21a (which is under Sponsor Ballot in IEEE SA and the work
is almost done) also supports EAP.  I suggest adding IEEE 802.21a.

(There may be some other EAP lower layers which I miss to mention.)

[5]  References [RFC4006] and [80211U-D4.01] are not used.

Best Regards,
Yoshihiro Ohba



(2011/10/14 6:15), Joe Salowey wrote:
> THe working group last call for draft-ietf-emu-chbind-09 ends October 21, 
> 2011.   So far we have received few comments on the list.   Please review  
> the document and post your comments to the list.  Comments indicating that 
> you have read the document and not found any issues are also useful.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Joe
> _______________________________________________
> 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