eap Mailing List: Re: hopefully final changes for draft-ietf-eap-keying

[Dan Harkins (dharkins]

  Dunno. Did they ever send a letter that said, "we are violating your
precepts; will you please change them for us?"?

  Dan.

On Sat, November 17, 2007 10:05 pm, Bernard_Aboba [at] hotmail.com wrote:
> Dan Harkins said:
>
>> As I said in a separate post, what 11r stated it wanted from the IETF
>> when
>> it removed a secure 3 party protocol from its draft was not a relaxation
>> on
>> key sharing but a secure 3 party protocol.
>
> Did 11r ever send a liaison to this effect?
>
> I do recall a discussion on this, but I don't think that the letter was
> ever
> sent.
>
> The typical way to move forward in such as case would be to publish the
> 11r
> 3rd party
> protocol design.   That is what we did with RFC 4017, which was judged to
> be
> outside the realm of IEEE 802.11i, since it dealt with EAP.
>
> Since the development of the EKMF was coordinated quite closely with IEEE
> 802.11
> (EAP WG even had a joint interim meeting with 11), it should not be
> surprising
> that the EKMF and 11r are generally in sync.  However, it took a while for
> 11r to
> get into sponsor ballot, so that it was not possible to include examples
> from it within the
> EKMF document.   At this point, fixing that would require too many
> changes.
> In any case,
> the 11r document is largely self-explanatory.
>
>