eap Mailing List: RE: RE: Comments on draft-adrangi-eap-network-discovery-07.txt

[Glen Zorn (gwz) (gwz]

Adrangi, Farid <mailto:farid.adrangi [at] intel.com> supposedly
scribbled:

> Hi Glen,
> Please see my comments inline.
> Farid
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Glen Zorn (gwz) [mailto:gwz [at] cisco.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 4:54 PM
>> To: 'Bari, Farooq'; Adrangi, Farid; iesg [at] ietf.org
>> Cc: Lortz, Victor; Pasi.Eronen [at] nokia.com; eap [at] frascone.com;
'Stephen
>> Hayes (TX/EUS)'; 'Salowey, Joe'
>> Subject: RE: [eap] RE: Comments on
>> draft-adrangi-eap-network-discovery-07.txt
>> 
>> 
>> Bari, Farooq <mailto:Farooq.Bari [at] cingular.com> supposedly
scribbled:
>> 
>>> Hi Glen,
>>> 
>>> I am not sure why you are opening this particular discussion at
the
>>> last minute, more than a year after we closed this topic in the
EAP
>>> WG group.
>> 
>> It appears that this is not an EAP WG work item.  It only came to
my
>> attention that the IETF Last Call was ending Friday on Thursday,
and
>> I was actually not planning to comment; however, I was strongly
>> encouraged to do so by several others.  In any case, I believe
that
>> in this body topics are open for discussion until the last Last
Call
>> ends. 
>> 
> 
> Yes. This is an individual submission.  I believe we had 3 pseudo
> last calls (initiated by Bernard) before the draft was sent to
IESG,
> and also the WG had this draft reviewed by IEEE/WIEN and received
an
> official feedback/approval from the chair of IEEE/WIEN -- the
report
> was posted on the list by Bernard and Jari.    
> 
> We (authors) do encourage you to review the draft.  But, I don't
> think we want to repeat or rehash the discussion that we have had
in
> last two years.  A few things could help:  (1) You might want to
> review the archives (in last two years) on this thread and I am
sure
> you will find answers to most of your questions.  (2) You might
want
> to review the problem statement for network selection (written by
> Bernard and Jari). (3) You might want to review Release-6
3GPP/WLAN
> (stage 2 and 3      
> documents) which will provide an overview how this concept is
used.
> Your colleague, Mark Grayson, could also be a good source of the
> information, as he was involved in the design of network selection
in
> 3GPP.  

OK, so I'm not just trying to give you a hard time.  I also believe
myself to be neither a super-genius who can spot problems where
others cannot, nor delusional enough to imagine problems where there
are none (though Farooq may disagree with that ;-).  I have read all
the references (both normative and informative) cited in the draft,
several of them many times & co-authored one of them.  I was
co-chair of the WG that developed the original NAI spec.
Nevertheless, I still don't understand exactly how this thing would
work in practice & I still have serious (to me, anyway) questions
about both the security of the proposal and about its compatibility
with existing IETF models of roaming.  I believe that others could
reasonably pose similar questions.  Yet, RFCs are (I think) supposed
to be more or less standalone documents: if a person reads the RFC
and the normative texts referenced therein, that person (assuming
average intelligence & appropriate training) should understand
clearly the RFC in question.  Perhaps I'm just an idiot, but if not,
then telling me to read 2 years of email archives and hundreds of
pages of documentation from an external SDO in order to understand
an RFC is just unacceptable, IMHO.

<extensive explanation/justification of why everything is fine
elided>

Hope this helps,

~gwz

Why is it that most of the world's problems can't be solved by
simply
  listening to John Coltrane? -- Henry Gabriel