Re: [Emu] TEAP Request-Action TLV

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

Eliot Lear <lear=[e-mail]> wrote:
    > Here is a circumstance one could easily imagine, and in fact we
    > attempted to address in draft-lear-eap-teap-brski:

    > Client requires a new certificate for some reason or another.  Perhaps
    > its is about to expire, or perhaps the signer has been compromised, or
    > what have you.

I think that's a really bad example.  I can talk about the reasons, but I
think it would detract from your query.
Maybe you can give me a different use case?

    > We were thinking that we could use the Request-Action Frame for this
    > purpose with a type of PKCS#10.  But that now seems wrong, as the
    > language in the draft states that one appends a Request-Action frame
    > with a full TLV, and not just a type,  and further that the other end
    > process the TLV.  In looking at Jouni’s code, he is doing precisely
    > that with the PAC TLV.

    > And so it seems we have three choices:

    > Create a new TLV that has a length of two that can be used in a REQUEST_ACTION frame.
    > Create a new TLV that is what we thought we meant: here is a list of
    > two(ish)-byte types whose TLVs I want you to send to me.

    > Hard code the ordering of requests so everyone knows what to expect.

--
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-