Re: IETF Last Call on draft-funk-eap-ttls-v0-04.txt

[Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba at hotmail.com>]

Overall this document looks good.  I only have two minor comments.
 
Section 12.2
 
"For EAP-TTLSv0, the Peer-Id is null."
 
I agree that the Peer-Id is null in the case where there is server-only
authentication and no cryptographic binding, since in this case, the
identity of the peer entity contributing to the keying material is not known.
 
However, when client certificate authentication is used in Phase 1, I
would suggest that the Peer-Id is defined as in [RFC5216] Section 5.2.

NITs:
Change [RFC2716bis] to [RFC5216] everywhere. From ietf-bounces at ietf.org Tue Apr 29 12:15:30 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-archive at megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive at core3.amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 213DA3A6DD1; Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:15:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: ietf at core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf at core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6753228C28B for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:15:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.731 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.731 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.867, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ExAafLwP5aYy for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:15:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from blu139-omc2-s1.blu139.hotmail.com (blu139-omc2-s1.blu139.hotmail.com [65.55.175.171]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07AE63A6AD8 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:15:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BLU137-W10 ([65.55.162.186]) by blu139-omc2-s1.blu139.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:15:30 -0700 Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [131.107.0.105] From: Bernard Aboba To: , , Subject: Re: IETF Last Call on draft-funk-eap-ttls-v0-04.txt Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:15:31 -0700 Importance: Normal MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Apr 2008 19:15:30.0940 (UTC) FILETIME=[6414E3C0:01C8AA2D] X-BeenThere: ietf at ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="============== 95295461==" Sender: ietf-bounces at ietf.org Errors-To: ietf-bounces at ietf.org

Overall this document looks good.  I only have two minor comments.
 
Section 12.2
 
"For EAP-TTLSv0, the Peer-Id is null."
 
I agree that the Peer-Id is null in the case where there is server-only
authentication and no cryptographic binding, since in this case, the
identity of the peer entity contributing to the keying material is not known.
 
However, when client certificate authentication is used in Phase 1, I
would suggest that the Peer-Id is defined as in [RFC5216] Section 5.2.

NITs:
Change [RFC2716bis] to [RFC5216] everywhere.

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf