Alan DeKok <al...@deployingradius.com> wrote:
> On Aug 30, 2023, at 6:29 AM, Owen Friel (ofriel)
<ofriel=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi EMU Chairs,
>>
>> I was looking to see if any minor updates are needed to
draft-ietf-emu-bootstrapped-tls-03 before IETF 118 and WGLC.
>>
>> There was one outstanding action from IETF 117:
>>
>> Do we want to say there is an eap.arpa domain? Yes, but
>> not clear this draft is place to do that. Chairs to ask IAB to do
>> this.
> I had discussed this off-line with the chairs, and they were waiting for
me to do something. I've bene trying to get TEAP out of the way, but I've just
posted an "eap.arpa" draft now.
> It's still very rough, but the idea is "use someth...@eap.arp". And
> then fill in some suggestions.
So, this replaces draft-richardson-emu-eap-onboarding-03
which would use onboard...@eap.arpa. (Hmm. I keep thinking it was going to
be "nob...@eap.arpa")
> HTML: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-dekok-emu-eap-arpa-00.html
You use por...@eap.arpa here.
I think that this is a mistake to be so specific.
I don't think the supplicant should know/care, at this point, what kind of
access it is going to get. I liked what we we had done with eap-onboarding
where you get limited network, and then if DHCP says, via the DHCP option
(or the RA option) that there is a captive portal, then it should do that.
Or, it could say do RFC8995 (BRSKI) via GRASP announcement.
Or...
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
