Re: [Emu] EMU charter revision,

["Hao Zhou (hzhou)" <hzhou at cisco.com>]

I like Bernard's text better. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: emu-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:emu-bounces at ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of Bernard Aboba
> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 7:54 PM
> To: Joseph Salowey (jsalowey); emu at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Emu] EMU charter revision,
> 
> [Joe] Jari had asked to keep this open to TLS.  I think he 
> was suggesting it could be done as a TLS extension and would 
> not require tunneling.  I agree that we do not want to extend 
> EAP-TLS to do tunneling. 
> 
> How about:
> 
> "- Enable a TLS-based EAP method to support channel bindings. 
> This item will not generate a new method, rather it will 
> focus on supporting EAP channel bindings within the tunnel 
> method.  The possiblity of adding channel bindings to EAP-TLS 
> through a TLS extension or other standard TLS mechanism may 
> also be investigated. " 
> 
> [BA] I think we only want one mechanism for support of 
> channel bindings in TLS-based methods.  So it's ok to 
> investigate a TLS extension vs.
> other mechanisms for supporting channel bindings, but I'd 
> suggest we only want to choose one path.  So my suggestion 
> would be to modify the text as follows:
> 
> - Enable a TLS-based EAP method to support channel bindings.  
> This item will not generate a new method, rather it will 
> focus on adding support for EAP channel bindings.  Potential 
> mechanisms for addition of support for channel bindings will 
> be investigated, including tunneling of channel
> binding parameters, or a TLS extension or other standard TLS 
> mechanism."   
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Emu mailing list
> Emu at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
> 
_______________________________________________
Emu mailing list
Emu at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu