Re: [Emu] Question for draft-ietf-emu-tls-eap-types-03

Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> Mon, 05 July 2021 14:43 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@lear.ch>
X-Original-To: emu@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: emu@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42C273A1A33 for <emu@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 07:43:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.428
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.428 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.338, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=lear.ch
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9oF5PYJBYOxd for <emu@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 07:43:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (upstairs.ofcourseimright.com [185.32.222.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFA473A1A32 for <emu@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 07:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:420:c0c0:1002::5c6] ([IPv6:2001:420:c0c0:1002:0:0:0:5c6]) (authenticated bits=0) by upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-18) with ESMTPSA id 165EhSWE068049 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 5 Jul 2021 16:43:28 +0200
Authentication-Results: upstairs.ofcourseimright.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lear.ch
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=lear.ch; s=upstairs; t=1625496209; bh=1/2L08A9uoaRy2UNahqo+Gwz1EhqJz1IguKGFqmRGZA=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=W55u52uWx9WrlV8aRCqqP0Ts3eaXN5iPqsDlD16Cx3NsS1x6p7tj8xRquDoWj5Tj9 o6d/JWX+DeNC4U2l13Ylgjdqhizc+DW/KuyAESaP5Mc0YvCPeK3EoCvbM4OLfZOQjG ySDZzJr7i4ZZQjbw00vizRWodWko/JRrOjanb7gY=
To: Carolin Baumgartner <latze@angry-red-pla.net>, emu@ietf.org
References: <DB6D339A-710C-4EC4-9F8E-4B8602632AE1@deployingradius.com> <CABXxEz8EBUz_y1FmQTE9C8cpF+3vqy-mPCx8CnyUMZ72pNifAA@mail.gmail.com> <SJ0PR00MB1038767373E0DE9E3D7BE0DA95039@SJ0PR00MB1038.namprd00.prod.outlook.com> <C7DBE2EB-82BF-4229-B0AF-4BA48B2D45BC@deployingradius.com> <7332.1624927848@localhost> <4F79B7DB-7E55-4564-88AE-C6E2AF8FD293@deployingradius.com> <26359.1625006432@localhost> <BFA8E5C4-D368-41BF-AFA9-BAA35B666F8A@deployingradius.com> <a02d4815-dbfa-e0a0-99fb-0f53127f2fd1@lear.ch> <13DD39D5-57C4-48D2-868A-C4D530127095@deployingradius.com> <79e7dff7-c473-762f-b7f4-3d056b6953fe@lear.ch> <9235E3E6-1346-4481-A7C8-EEFEF4D56A7F@deployingradius.com> <SJ0PR00MB10384831490B8F890DE2FCC4951E9@SJ0PR00MB1038.namprd00.prod.outlook.com> <1A06136A-BA13-47A2-8C27-B6841F95D3CA@deployingradius.com> <9e71b858-d5c6-8265-3c11-95d7d75cdeae@lear.ch> <95D7A8DB-0FF0-4F7D-AA84-F146D820B0B4@deployingradius.com> <112317d3-4c26-caf9-3118-a8d58c1acfdf@angry-red-pla.net>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>
Message-ID: <7ae31dc3-7e1e-8295-f7b8-7a704182e8b7@lear.ch>
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2021 16:43:27 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <112317d3-4c26-caf9-3118-a8d58c1acfdf@angry-red-pla.net>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IGyVx1q6ftBGB5rl7tbLDehlDAIX4sorw"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emu/iQw5KvgvKefYueuCsYsvA4cexqw>
Subject: Re: [Emu] Question for draft-ietf-emu-tls-eap-types-03
X-BeenThere: emu@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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: Mon, 05 Jul 2021 14:43:38 -0000

Is this something we should do here or in IOTOPS?

I think it would be cool to develop at least something of a requirements 
doc.  And there are some tools out there, even at the EAP level.  But 
They don't all fit together well.

Eliot

On 05.07.21 16:20, Carolin Baumgartner wrote:
>
>
> On 7/3/21 1:57 PM, Alan DeKok wrote:
>> On Jul 3, 2021, at 7:47 AM, Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> wrote:
>>> I don't think Tim could be blamed for holding the view that there is 
>>> a separation between specifications and how they are used. There's 
>>> good and bad to the practice.  The good is that the spec can be used 
>>> in ways that the creators didn't intend, and thus perahsp there are 
>>> fewer unnecessary constraints.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, not having a theory of operation section, as we 
>>> do have in a good number of our specs, leads to people really not 
>>> understanding when they are applicable, and perhaps more 
>>> importantly, when they are not.
>>    People don't even understand how to use the specs as intended. 
>> We're essentially telling people "EAP methods are applicable in these 
>> situations, but good luck actually trying to get them deployed, 
>> you're on your own".
> I agree and out of experience everything that leaves just a little bit 
> room of interpretation ("you can do it this way or that way") ends up 
> in misinterpretions or gaps and causes good ideas to fail.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emu mailing list
> Emu@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
>