Re: IETF last call on draft-barany-eap-gee-04.txt

[Lakshminath Dondeti <ldondeti at qualcomm.com>]

At 08:20 AM 12/29/2006, Yoshihiro Ohba wrote:
> Hi Lakshminath,
>
> On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 08:20:35AM -0800, Lakshminath Dondeti wrote:
> >
> > On your comment about whether or not a 1 octet field is necessary, my
> > opinion is that it is the most optimal design (cannot be any smaller
> > :)).  I don't think ethertype will work in a generic sense to
> > distinguish multiple parallel EAP conversations (we are not talking
> > about multiple "types" of conversations, but instead multiple
> > conversations).
>
> The draft clearly talks about multiple types of authentications.

Hmm.  I see your point now, but please note that the types were 
listed as placeholders (Types 1 and 2) and examples (access and 
service) explaining the need for multiple authentication.  If we use 
ethertypes or something like that I think we have to "fix" the 
types.  As written now (in terms of transaction ID or TID), it is 
plausible to use GEE for various different types of authentications 
(if not now, in the future).  That kind of extensibility will be gone 
with what you propose.

Hope that clarifies things.

regards,
Lakshminath


> Yoshihiro Ohba


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