Sam: My review comments:
1. Section 3, paragraph 1, should " far removed" be "far remoted"? 2. Section 3, bottom of Page 6, should "virtual Lads (VLANs)" be "virtual LANs (VLANs)"? 3. Section 5.1, page 14, paragraph 2, should "I2" be "i2"? 4. So, client sends channel-binding data automatically or by its configuration, not per server request? It seems inefficient for peer send a big chunk of i1 without knowing whether the server supports channel binding or what information is needs. Might be better if server can request it and specific information before the peer sends it. 5. Section 7, should the title be Channel-binding AVP instead, as it talks all about AVP, not TLV? On 10/19/11 4:09 PM, "Sam Hartman" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I believe I've addressed all of Alan's comments with the exception of > removing the RADIUS diagram from 5.3. > Thanks Alan for the comments! > > --Sam > _______________________________________________ > Emu mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu _______________________________________________ Emu mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
