| RE: Issue: Use of term lower layer | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
|
From: Alper Yegin (alper.yegin |
|
| Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 04:54:28 -0800 (PST) | |
> >I have read Issue 313, but I think it does not solve the SAP issue for > >PANA because PANA EP is not authenticator or even part of > >authenticator. > > > > > It could be, if you define authenticator = PAA + EP, or? I have always perceived the "authenticator" as the node that hosts the "EAP authenticator". We could say NAS = PAA + EAP + RADIUS_client + EP; where we can see "EP" as a "NAS port". Does this make sense? Alper
- Re: Issue: Use of term lower layer, (continued)
- Re: Issue: Use of term lower layer Jari Arkko, December 13 2005
- Re: Issue: Use of term lower layer Yoshihiro Ohba, December 13 2005
- Re: Issue: Use of term lower layer Jari Arkko, December 13 2005
- Re: Issue: Use of term lower layer Yoshihiro Ohba, December 13 2005
- RE: Issue: Use of term lower layer Alper Yegin, December 19 2005
- Re: Issue: Use of term lower layer Jari Arkko, December 13 2005
- Re: Issue: Use of term lower layer Jari Arkko, December 14 2005
Results generated by Tiger Technologies using MHonArc.