Re: [radext] A way forward with the DTLS document

Forbid the multiplexing. - Just easier.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: radext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:radext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Jouni Korhonen
> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 2:25 AM
> To: radext@ietf.org
> Cc: Joseph Salowey (jsalowey); Alan DeKok
> Subject: [radext] A way forward with the DTLS document - a poll for WG
> consensus
> Importance: High
> 
> 
> Folks,
> 
> We still have a sticking issue with the DTLS document on protocol
> multiplexing raised by Joe, see:
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/radext/current/msg08459.html
> 
> So, in order to progress things and get the (rough) WG consensus what to
> include in the document, We ask the WG to pick up their favourite approach
> from the two choices below. This poll ends on Tuesday 25th June EOB
(EEST).
> 
> 1) Forbid the protocol multiplexing i.e.,
>    require RADIUS over port 1812.
> 
> 2) Allow protocol multiplexing i.e.,
>    Allow RADIUS or DTLS over port 1812.
> 
> In both cases, DTLS would be allowed on the DTLS-only TBD port.
> The DTLS document will then be changed accordingly to reflect the WG
> consensus.
> 
> 
> - Jouni & Mauricio
> _______________________________________________
> radext mailing list
> radext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext

Re: [radext] A way forward with the DTLS document - a poll for WG consensus