[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Many thanks for your remark, I have transfered it to > the EAP-PSK design team and they should come back to > you by tomorrow after having studied the TTLS design > you suggest.
*Please* use the TTLS format. It's actually the Diameter format, which has been around for ~6 years. It's been peer reviewed, and the attribute design is included in published RFC's. > However, when you say "If you want to convince people > to use your system, re-using existing code & design is > excellent practice", you seem quite unfair IMHO as the > EAP-PSK attribute design is precisely inspired by the > EAP-SIM AT-Identity attribute design EAP-SIM has not been peer reviewed. The author has been asked to change the format, and has not done so. The protocol has *not* been accepted by the IETF EAP group as a WG document, and most likely will NEVER be published as an RFC. If you want your protocol to be accepted and published as a standard, using the TTLS/Diameter attribute format will help. Using the EAP-SIM attribute format will not help. Alan DeKok. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
