On 4/15/2011 7:55 PM, Alan DeKok wrote: > We had 4 responses on the list, in addition to the discussion at IETF. > > Q1: 4 yes > 0 No > > Q2: 3 EAP-FASTv2 > 1 EAP-TEAM
I think that you should trying counting again. > > The WG consensus is that EAP-FASTv2 should be the tunnel method. > > Alan DeKok wrote: >> For people who didn't attend the EMU meeting at IETF, please answer >> the following consensus call: >> >> Question 1: Are you ready to make a decision on the EAP tunneled method? >> >> Please indicate Yes or No. >> >> Question 2: If the answer to Question 1 is "Yes", please indicate >> support for one of the two proposed methods: >> >> FASTv2 >> or >> EAP-Team >> > ... >> Thursday April 14. That gives us 2 weeks, which is usual for a >> consensus call. > > _______________________________________________ > Emu mailing list > Emu@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu > >
<<attachment: gwz.vcf>>
_______________________________________________ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
