Re: [Nea] Verifying consensus on next steps re TLS/TCP-based PT

latze@angry-red-pla.net Tue, 12 April 2011 08:45 UTC

Return-Path: <latze@angry-red-pla.net>
X-Original-To: nea@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nea@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 479DDE06B6 for <nea@ietfc.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 01:45:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6LtHVkZoJWML for <nea@ietfc.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 01:45:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from thuvia.angry-red-pla.net (thuvia.angry-red-pla.net [83.169.33.217]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 786D2E06B2 for <nea@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 01:45:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=thuvia.angry-red-pla.net) by thuvia.angry-red-pla.net with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <latze@angry-red-pla.net>) id 1Q9ZE8-0005Fu-3o for nea@ietf.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:45:37 +0200
Received: from 193.5.238.18 (SquirrelMail authenticated user latze) by thuvia.angry-red-pla.net with HTTP; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:45:36 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <486bf848fa84a7340368018914aa4afa.squirrel@thuvia.angry-red-pla.net>
In-Reply-To: <043901FAFD488D44ACC9CCED00470BDC04B29BEB@XMB-RCD-105.cisco.com>
References: <043901FAFD488D44ACC9CCED00470BDC04B29BEB@XMB-RCD-105.cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:45:36 +0200
From: latze@angry-red-pla.net
To: nea@ietf.org
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
Subject: Re: [Nea] Verifying consensus on next steps re TLS/TCP-based PT
X-BeenThere: nea@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Endpoint Assessment discussion list <nea.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/nea>, <mailto:nea-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nea>
List-Post: <mailto:nea@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nea-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea>, <mailto:nea-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 08:45:39 -0000

Support

> At IETF80, there was a discussion on next steps regarding the individual
> submissions for a TLS/TCP-based PT, and an EAP-based PT.
>
> Specifically, there are 2 proposals for a TLS/TCP-based transport
> documented in the following I-Ds:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sangster-nea-pt-tls-02.txt
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-cam-winget-eap-tlv-03.txt
>
> At the meeting, there was unanimous consensus to merge the TLS/TCP
> proposals in the above I-Ds as follows:
> - Support client authentication using the SASL framework
> - Support vendor extensions
> - Support error handling
>
> The authors of the above I-Ds have agreed to work on a joint WG
> submission.
>
> The chairs would like to verify this consensus on the mailing
> list. Please review the proposal and respond by Monday, 5pm PT on
> Apr 18. Indicate in your response whether you support the changes.
> If you support the changes, a one word response ("Support") is
> sufficient. If not, please explain your concerns and suggest how
> they could be resolved.
>
> Thanks
> Susan
> ----------------------------
>
> Note: No consensus has yet been reached on the EAP-based proposals, in
> particular, whether to use an EAP method or EAP-TLV for carrying posture
> information. The next step is to document the strengths and weaknesses
> of these 2 approaches to help make a decision.
> _______________________________________________
> Nea mailing list
> Nea@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea
>