Re: [Emu] WG consensus on charter update

[Lakshminath Dondeti <ldondeti at qualcomm.com>]

I know it's after the deadline, but I think we should clarify some of 
the text to avoid debates on interpretation later.  (Note: this is going 
to sound like nit picking :) ).

For instance, on,
"Enable a TLS-based EAP method to support channel bindings. So as to
enable RFC 2716bis to focus solely on clarifications to the existing
protocol, this effort will be handled in a separate document.  This item
will not generate a new method, rather it will enhance EAP-TLS or the
TLS based tunnel method.  "

Which is "the TLS based tunnel method" that is going to be enhanced?

We need to specify what we mean by channel bindings.  Is there an agreed 
upon definition that we can refer to?

regards,
Lakshminath

On 1/24/2008 9:44 AM, Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) wrote:
> So far I have only seen responses from Dan Harkins on the proposed
> charter update 
> ( http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/emu/current/msg00712.html )
>
> Please respond on the list if you have reviewed the charter and have
> comments or if you approve of the current text.  Also make sure to
> review the milestones.  
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joe
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emu mailing list
> Emu at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu


_______________________________________________
Emu mailing list
Emu at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu