[Emu] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-emu-eap-noob-05: (with COMMENT)

Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 18 August 2021 00:51 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: emu@ietf.org
Delivered-To: emu@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26AF13A182B; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 17:51:21 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-emu-eap-noob@ietf.org, emu-chairs@ietf.org, emu@ietf.org, joe@salowey.net, joe@salowey.net
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.36.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
Message-ID: <162924788051.13620.5884747828900938559@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 17:51:21 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emu/8YyRET1CqtHk-5pZyrQm1uETPY4>
Subject: [Emu] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-emu-eap-noob-05: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: emu@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "EAP Methods Update \(EMU\)" <emu.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/emu>, <mailto:emu-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/emu/>
List-Post: <mailto:emu@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emu-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu>, <mailto:emu-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 00:51:22 -0000

Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-emu-eap-noob-05: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


Thanks for the many updates to address my Discuss and Comment points.

Just a few final thoughts from reading the diff from -04 to -05:

Section 5.6

It's interesting to see the eap-noob.arpa registration lose discussion about
who should care and why (i.e., the list from RFC 6761).  I guess I see how
it's not specifically required by 6761 itself, but it seemed useful to think

Section 7.2

The first and second paragraphs both start with the same sentence, which makes
me suspect that there are some editing remnants left.

Section 7.7

Many thanks for adding this treatment of channel binding.  The actual
properties provided are weaker than I'd like, but attempting to diverge from
RFC 6677 in this document seems unlikely to actually be useful, so I'll have
to accept what is possible.