I think we need to have some review of the EAP-FAST and TEAP sections before publication. If we can't get the review then maybe we should remove those sections. Is someone willing to step up and review these sections of the draft, preferably who has implementation experience?
Thanks, Joe On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 1:24 PM Alan DeKok <al...@deployingradius.com> wrote: > On Aug 12, 2022, at 4:00 PM, Joseph Salowey <j...@salowey.net> wrote: > > [Joe] The chairs are reviewing the status and will have an update next > week. > > Thanks. > > > [Joe] Is the statement in the draft about lack of implementation > experience with EAP-FAST and TEAP still accurate? > > Yes. I haven't seen any progress on EAP-FAST. TEAP might actually > work, as implementors are working on interoperability. But the base TEAP > spec still has issues unrelated to TLS 1.3. So that might take a while to > get finished. > > > You mentioned some interop issues in the meeting, are those issues on > the path to getting resolved? > > The interop issues were (a) a crash which is being worked on, and (b) a > choice to not support session tickets for TTLS, which has been reported and > is being addressed. > > So not so much interop issues as implementation issues. > > At this point. everything we know is in the document and is up to date. > I think it's worth publishing. Given the lack of interest in FAST / TEAP > with TLS 1.3, I think that shouldn't be a barrier to publication. > > > Alan DeKok. > >
_______________________________________________ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
