Alan DeKok <[email protected]> wrote: > For me, I would be fine with making the anonymous NAI mandatory. I > just don't see any end-user benefit to exposing their identities. And > there are benefits to privacy.
>> In terms of infrastructure, logging into a wireless controller, switch
>>or NMS and seeing hundreds of "[email protected]" makes an
>>administrator's life miserable. Most folks in a large enterprise
>>responsible for troubleshooting end user access do not have access to
>>the EAP server.
> If I were hard-nosed, I would say that's an internal management issue,
> and not a standards issue. But I get your point, and there are ways to
> address this (see below).
It might be a lack of standard way to access logs of EAP server issue.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Emu mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
