Re: FW: Last Call: draft-harkins-emu-eap-pwd (EAP Authentication Using Only A Password) to Informational RFC

[Jari Arkko <jari.arkko at piuha.net>]

My opinion is also that the best place to develop standards track EAP 
methods is in a WG. We've published a fair number of other methods 
through other means, and they have generally been either Informational 
or Experimental. Of course, there is no hard and fast rule. But in this 
situation I think getting the WG involved would be beneficial.

It sounds like many people are of the opinion that this work would be 
useful, but that the EMU WG does not have bandwidth to deal with another 
work item. I'm not sure how to solve that problem. Creating a new 
working group may not help, because its really the same experts that 
should be looking at EAP method documents. But I hope that we have made 
a correct assessment that the WG does not have the bandwidth. Sometimes 
we restrict WGs to a limited number of work items without realizing that 
people's interests to work on specific topics cannot be transferred to 
other topics.

In any case, the ability to have a real impact in implementations should 
be a guiding factor in deciding to adopt work. I'm a little worried 
based on Russ' information that there are no implementors beyond the 
authors. Is that one implementation, or several from the different 
authors, by the way? Standards track specifications should be 
interesting enough for at least a few different implementors.

Jari