eap Mailing List: Re: Issue on eap-keying: naming of AMSks

[Jari Arkko (jari.arkko]

I agree with the suggested resolution. --Jari

Florent Bersani wrote:
>    Description of issue: should AMSK naming be mandatory?
>
>    Submitter name: Florent Bersani
>
>    Submitter email address: florent.bersani [at] francetelecom.com
>
>    Date first submitted: 10/04/2004
>
>    Document: Keying Framework
>
>    Comment type: 'E'ditorial
>
>    Priority: 1 should fix
>
>    Section: 2.4
>
>    Rationale/Explanation of issue:
>
> section 2.4 reads:  "AMSK Name
>
>       AMSKs, if any, may be named by the concatenation of the string
>       "AMSK", key label, application data (see Appendix F), and EMSK
>       Name."
>
> However, I think it is sound practice to name keys. Since AMSK are new, 
> we shouldn't be bothered with legacy reasons. Hence, why not make this 
> AMSK naming "mandatory"
>
>
>
> Requested change
>
> Replace the previous text by
> "AMSK Name
>
> AMSKs, if any, are named by concatenating the string
>       "AMSK", key label, application data (see Appendix F), and EMSK
>       Name."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eap mailing list
> eap [at] frascone.com
> http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap