eap Mailing List: Re: review of netsel-05

[Bari, Farooq (farooq.bari]

Regarding 375, I am attaching Ohba san's email on eap reflector from
last year that requested to disregard his previous email. So this issue
seems to be resolved.

 
Farooq Bari
 
farooq.bari [at] att.com
+1 425 580 5526
 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bernard Aboba [mailto:bernard_aboba [at] hotmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:47 AM
> To: eap [at] frascone.com
> Subject: Re: [eap] review of netsel-05
> 
> I have resolved issues 330, 331, 332, 334, 335 and 336 as 
> fixed in NETSEL-05.  I am assuming that 333 will be resolved in -06.
> 
> That still leaves Issues 374, 375, 376, 377, and 378 open.
> 
> Can the submitters of those issues look over the document and 
> post whether their concerns have been resolved?
> 
> The document is available for inspection here:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-eap-netsel-prob
> lem-05.txt
> 
> >Jari Arkko said:
> 
> >First, there are some open issues in the issue tracker. I consider 
> >issues 330-336 now mostly closed, based on the revisions in the new 
> >drafts. Thanks. For issue 333 there is one small remaining 
> thing, noted 
> >below.
> >
> >What is the situation with the other issues? They have been made for 
> >previous revisions, have they been resolved in -05?
> >
> >I also re-read the document and noticed two small editorial issues, 
> >also noted below.
> >
> >But otherwise I think the document is ready. Ship it!
> >
> >Parts remaining from issue 333:
> >
> > >    Section 4 gives the conclusions
> > >    and some suggestions on how to proceed for the rest.
> >This should be: "Section 4 presents our conclusions."
> >
> >Editorial:
> >
> > >    discussion of the limitations of certain classes of solution,
> >
> >s/solution/solutions/
> >
> >
> > > The solution ...
> >
> >Multiple occurrences of this. I think the draft should not 
> assume that 
> >we have a single solution in this space.
> >Therefore, we should typically write "Solutions should 
> satisfy ... " as 
> >opposed to "The solution should satisfy ..."
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
> http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap
> 
> Arhives: http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/eap
> 
> --- Begin Message ---
> Please disregard my minor comment in my previous email.  I was
> referring that NAP and ISP separate authentication to be removed from
> PANA basic specification.  There was no discussion to remove the ISP
> selection functionality in the PANA basic specification.
> Sorry for my confusion.
>
> Yoshihiro Ohba
>
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 04:58:39PM -0400, Yoshihiro Ohba wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > The document looks good to me.
> > 
> > One minor comment on Section 3.1:
> > 
> > "
> >    The PANA protocol [17] has a mechanism to advertise and select "ISPs"
> >    through the exchange of the ISP-Information AVP in its initial
> >    exchange.
> > "
> > 
> > "
> >    The use of
> >    other network identifiers than domain names is also possible, for
> >    instance the PANA protocol uses an a free form string and an SMI
> >    Network Management Private Enterprise Code [17], or Mobile Network
> >    Codes embedded in NAIs as specified in 3GPP.
> > "
> > 
> > The description is true for the current version of PANA specification.
> > However, the latest discussion in the PANA WG will make the network
> > selection functionality be specified in a separate document other than
> > specifying it in the PANA base specification.  
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Yoshihiro Ohba
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 07:04:28AM -0700, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> > > No comments were received on the EAP Network Selection document during EAP 
> > > WG last call.
> > > 
> > > This makes it difficult to tell whether this is because lots of people read 
> > > it and could not find fault with it, or because few people read it.
> > > 
> > > Therefore in order to move the document forward, we are going to request 
> > > that individuals who have read the document post to the list to indicate 
> > > that they approve its publication.   If you have read it and have comments, 
> > > please post these to the list as well.   In order to move forward, we will 
> > > need at least 5 people (other than the authors and WG chairs) to indicate 
> > > approval.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
> > > http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap
> > > 
> > > Arhives: http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/eap
> > > 
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
> > http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap
> > 
> > Arhives: http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/eap
> > 
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> > For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > 
> _________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
> http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap
>
> Arhives: http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/eap
>
> --- End Message ---