The document is currently intended for standards track publication. But
both the abstract and the introduction mention "describes a service".
You don't describe a standards specification. You define it? Moreover, I
find the entire tone of the document to be somewhat lacking for a
standards
Hi Michael,
I guess the question you are asking is: what is the benefit of adding the
overhead of EAP. For EAP-TLS, you could directly use TLS. For EAP-pwd (which is
a PAKE) one could use any PAKE without the EAP encapsulation overhead?
Is your concern only in the context of IoT or do you
Hi ACE,
I guess EMU is happy to see new deployments and uses of EAP. I think ACE is
better suited for taking on this work if there is interest. EMU primarily deals
with the base EAP protocol and various EAP authentication methods. We can
obviously help with reviewing the document later on.
I
I am interested in working on this draft and I support its adoption as a
working group item.
--Mohit
On 11/19/19 4:44 PM, Daniel Migault wrote:
Dear working group,
As mentioned during the ACE meeting, this mail starts a call for adoption for
draft-palombini-ace-coap-pubsub-profile. Please
