Re: [Emu] EAP and authorization

[Alan DeKok <aland at deployingradius.com>]

Bernard Aboba wrote:
> Do we really need “IESG clarification” or a “consensus check” to verify
> that IESG approval of a work item for channel bindings should be
> interpreted as approval to actually work on channel bindings???

  No.

> Given that Channel Bindings is discussed in both RFC 3748 and 5247,  I 
> think we can say definitively that regardless of whether Channel Bindings
> are actually useful (personally, I have doubts) that they are within the 
> the scope of applicability of RFC 3748. 

  Yes.

> However, since those documents make it clear that Channel Bindings were 
> not intended as a generic authorization exchange (despite the confusion on
> that point within the Channel Bindings document).   Therefore IESG
> approval of
> a Channel Bindings work item should not be construed as a license to change
> the definition of Channel Bindings to satisfy another distinct need.   Doing
> so would require updating of RFC 3748 and 5247, which is not within the EMU
> WG charter.

  The discussion here is (a) if we can get *some* generic authorization
passed via methods used for Channel Bindings, and (b) is that a good idea.

  I think that the answer to (a) is "yes", and (b) is "some say yes,
some say no".

  Alan DeKok.