Hello EMU,
I would like to address a question I could not answer during today's
meeting.
Specifically, there was a question on the Chat from Alan about EAP-CREDS
adoption in CBRS-A. My information is a bit outdated, but AFAIK there
was no implementation (that I am aware of or publicly
Hi Mohit,
On 10/24/19 3:30 AM, Mohit Sethi M wrote:
Dear Dr. Pala,
[ ... ]
I replied privately to the first part of this e-mail - I apologize if my
e-mail did offend you or was in any way inappropriate. To clarify, my
questions were in reply to Mohit's comments to my previous e-mail
recall seeing your reply to that message).
Cheers,
Max
On 10/15/19 2:07 AM, Mohit Sethi M wrote:
Dear Dr. Pala,
I think we need to be more prudent when using terms such as
"credential provisioning" and "credential management". The bullet
later on in the current charter text
Hi Mohit, all,
sorry for the long delay in replying (probably mute at this point),
however I think the new text looks great. The only possible change I
would provide is the possibility to restrict the scope for the
credentials management part. In particular, I would change the following:
Hi all,
we are working on the definition of an EAP mechanism that should help
managing device credentials for access networks. We are finalizing some
parts of the document and I would like to get the input from the WG (I
know it is not a WG document, yet, but I hope it will get adopted). [*]
Hi EMU-ers,
being fairly new to the EAP world, I noticed that in some environment,
EAP is layered on top of other protocols - in particular RADIUS and
DIAMETER. I guess that in some environments this make sense because of
accounting purposes across operators, however this makes the protocol
uld be encoded with different structures and
encodings (e.g., DER, JSON, XML, CBOR, etc.)
Maybe we can write a BCP for EAP that includes both building blocks
(i.e., Fragmentation and Simple Authentication and Encryption) ?
What do you think ?
Cheers,
Max
On 2/14/19 4:54 AM, Mohit Sethi M wrote:
Hi Alan,
thanks for the answers... aligned with what I thought and they do make
sense... :D Further considerations inline...
On 2/12/19 11:26 AM, Alan DeKok wrote:
On Feb 12, 2019, at 12:36 PM, Dr. Pala wrote:
[...]
This, led me to my first question: is there a de-facto "standard
Hi all,
I am working on a draft for credentials management via EAP. When looking
at the different specifications, it seems a bit weird that EAP does not
provide Fragmentation control and requires each method to define their
own way.
/*This, led me to my first question:*/ is there a de-facto
Hi all,
in other environment we had to add the attribute about which ID was
actually authenticated in the final messages because of additional
operations that some network equipment needs to perform that requires
the identity of the supplicant to be disclosed (exactly to avoid the use
of an
Hi all,
I am in favor of addressing the issue of PFS in 3GPP authentication - it
is important work that moves cellular network authentication towards
more modern approaches and more compatible with IETF technologies.
This said, I am concerned about the fact that the IPR is not marked as
mention below (sorry for
>> taking so long to get back to your message). Does that sound like a
>> reasonable approach? That way the ADs can occasionally see how the
>> work is progressing and then make decisions.
>>
> The discussion can continue on the EMU list as long as it d
Hi Emu-ers,
I wanted to follow up the discussion from today's meeting. In
particular, there is some work that has been proposed that might require
re-chartering as indicated by Ekr and supported by the Chair(s).
I would like to push forward the request for re-chartering, in
particular, I would
Congratulations Mohit!
Now you can do more work for free :D
Cheers,
Max
On 7/20/18 9:43 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> I am pleased to announce that Mohit Sethi has agreed to serve as
> co-chair for EMU.
>
> Thanks to Mohit!
>
> -Ekr
___
Emu mailing
14 matches
Mail list logo
