| Re: New work item in EAP WG??: Questions fordraft-barany-eap-gee-01 | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
|
From: Nakhjiri Madjid-MNAKHJI1 (Madjid.Nakhjiri |
|
| Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:34:54 -0700 (PDT) | |
I did not miss the presentation. I may have missed a few emails here and there, given their number, but I missed on the IESG submission, in that case this work needs to be better communicated to the rest of security and AAA community. Madjid -----Original Message----- From: Narayanan, Vidya [mailto:vidyan [at] qualcomm.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 1:13 PM To: Nakhjiri Madjid-MNAKHJI1; Dondeti, Lakshminath; Quinn Li; Cao Zhen Cc: eap [at] frascone.com Subject: RE: [eap] New work item in EAP WG??: Questions fordraft-barany-eap-gee-01 Perhaps you missed the earlier emails on this and the presentation in Dallas? This is not requested as a work item for the EAP WG - we are only soliciting comments and feedback from the WG participants - the draft itself will be an individual submission to the IESG. Vidya > -----Original Message----- > From: Nakhjiri Madjid-MNAKHJI1 [mailto:Madjid.Nakhjiri [at] motorola.com] > Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 8:07 AM > To: Dondeti, Lakshminath; Quinn Li; Cao Zhen > Cc: eap [at] frascone.com > Subject: [eap] New work item in EAP WG??: Questions > fordraft-barany-eap-gee-01 > > > Madjid>>I am trying to understand all this. EAP WG is closing, which > means that it does not accept any new WG items? So first of > all this WG is not the place to standardize anything new. > Second even if it were. To standardize a new item, first > people describe the problem, then get it approved as a > problem that needs to be solved by the WG (i.e. WG item), > then people debate about how to solve it and if there are > multiple solutions which one is best. > Not only I think this has not yet been established as a > legitimate problem, but also I think challenging people by > demanding an alternate solution is not quite the IETF way to > do things. > > Madjid > > With your last statement, are you saying that there is > another way to demultiplex multiple parallel EAP exchanges? > If so, I would like to > read about it. Please share the reference. Thanks. > > regards, > Lakshminath > > _________________________________________________________________ > To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit: > http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap > > Arhives: http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/eap >
- Re: Questions for draft-barany-eap-gee-01, (continued)
- Re: Questions for draft-barany-eap-gee-01 Nakhjiri Madjid-MNAKHJI1, June 20 2006
- Re: Questions for draft-barany-eap-gee-01 Narayanan, Vidya, June 20 2006
- New work item in EAP WG??: Questions for draft-barany-eap-gee-01 Nakhjiri Madjid-MNAKHJI1, June 20 2006
- Re: New work item in EAP WG??: Questions fordraft-barany-eap-gee-01 Narayanan, Vidya, June 20 2006
- Re: New work item in EAP WG??: Questions fordraft-barany-eap-gee-01 Nakhjiri Madjid-MNAKHJI1, June 20 2006
- Re: Questions for draft-barany-eap-gee-01 Alper Yegin, June 19 2006
Results generated by Tiger Technologies using MHonArc.