| Re: Strawman -10 | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
|
From: Yoshihiro Ohba (yohba |
|
| Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 12:03:36 -0800 (PST) | |
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 09:44:59AM -0800, Bernard Aboba wrote: > >The channel-binding draft allows KDF to be provided by an EAP method > >while still satisfying the requirements of mode independence. > > Do we really want to require EAP methods to support KDFs in order to enable > the lower layer to generate keys from the EMSK? That would mean that > existing EAP methods wouldn't be usable on some lower layers. One of the > major advantages of EAP is the ability to support many lower layers. > It would be possible to define a particular hash algorithm as the default algorithm for prf+ in draft-ohba-eap-channel-binding for existing EAP methods. On the other hand, EAP methods would still need to have a functionality to negotiate on use of Channel Binding if Channel Binding is defined an optional functionality. Or do you expect lower layers to negotiate on use of Channel Binding in which case Channel Binding would not be usable for already deployed NASes? Yoshihiro Ohba
- RE: Strawman -10, (continued)
- RE: Strawman -10 Bernard Aboba, January 31 2006
-
RE: Strawman -10 Salowey, Joe, January 31 2006
-
Re: Strawman -10 Yoshihiro Ohba, February 1 2006
- Re: Strawman -10 Bernard Aboba, February 1 2006
- Re: Strawman -10 Yoshihiro Ohba, February 1 2006
- Re: Strawman -10 Bernard Aboba, February 1 2006
- Re: Strawman -10 Yoshihiro Ohba, February 1 2006
-
Re: Strawman -10 Yoshihiro Ohba, February 1 2006
- Re: Strawman -10 Jari Arkko, February 7 2006
- Re: Strawman -10 Bernard Aboba, February 7 2006
Results generated by Tiger Technologies using MHonArc.