>> The current specs define the base protocols, but leave pretty much >> everything else undefined.
That’s the job of a spec isn’t it? As far as I understand, deploying in the real world / best practices should go in a BCP. tim Sent from Mail for Windows 11 From: Alan DeKok<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Friday, July 2, 2021 3:02 PM To: Eliot Lear<mailto:[email protected]> Cc: EMU WG<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Emu] Question for draft-ietf-emu-tls-eap-types-03 On Jul 1, 2021, at 10:08 AM, Eliot Lear <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 01.07.21 15:23, Alan DeKok wrote: >> TEAP is one solution, but I don't think everyone is going to move to TEAP >> overnight. It would be nice to have solutions for existing (and deployed) >> EAP methods. > > Perhaps I lost the plot, but what do you propose? Less of a proposal than trying to define some requirements. EAP isn't used in a vacuum. The current specs define the base protocols, but leave pretty much everything else undefined. This means that people deploying EAP have to invent and/or discover their own methods to deploy certificates, tie users to machines, tie machines to credentials, etc. It would be very nice to say "here's how EAP can be used in the real world". Alan DeKok. _______________________________________________ Emu mailing list [email protected] https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Femu&data=04%7C01%7Ctim.cappalli%40microsoft.com%7C6a74ce41b7c6443645c308d93d8be0d2%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637608493715426663%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=3icw%2F1n6Q5WHXkLMYSDBGw%2BIerr7ZvgLlBYJRy%2FS%2BP8%3D&reserved=0
_______________________________________________ Emu mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
