I agree too. Lionel
> -----Message d'origine----- > De : Alper Yegin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Envoyé : jeudi 19 avril 2007 08:25 > À : 'Yoshihiro Ohba'; [email protected] > Objet : RE: [Pana] Piggybacking EAP in PAN > > I agree. > > Most of the benefits are realized when the PaC's "answer" can > carry "EAP response". > > The case where PAA needs to send PAN and can hang on to it > until it receives the next EAP Request seems less likely and > possibly not worth the complication. > > Alper > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Yoshihiro Ohba [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 2:01 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [Pana] Piggybacking EAP in PAN > > > > In Section 4.1: > > > > " > > EAP messages are carried in PANA-Auth-Request messages. > > PANA-Auth-Answer messages are simply used to acknowledge > receipt of > > the requests. As an optimization, a PANA-Auth-Answer message MAY > > include the EAP message. This optimization SHOULD NOT > be used when > > it takes time to generate the EAP message (due to, e.g., > intervention > > of human input), in which case returning an > PANA-Auth-Answer message > > without piggybacking an EAP message can avoid unnecessary > > retransmission of the PANA-Auth-Request message. > > " > > > > I think this piggybacking is allowed for PAN generated by PaC only. > > Piggybacking EAP for PAN generated by PAA should not allowed, > > otherwise the protocol operation can be complex. > > > > Yoshihiro Ohba > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pana mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pana > > > _______________________________________________ > Pana mailing list > [email protected] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pana > _______________________________________________ Pana mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pana
