Subject: [Emu] Proposed resolution to Dan Harkins' comments on

From: "Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 19:42:42 -0700

I've had some discussions with Dan and below are my suggestions to
resolve his comments.   I'll try to update the document next Monday,
5/3, with these changes and the changes to mandatory attributes
(http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/emu/current/msg01472.html)
depending upon the outcome of any discussion.  

Cheers,

Joe   

1) Remove section 4.1.2 as discussed in
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/emu/current/msg01367.html

2) Add section 3.9

"3.9 Certificate-less Authentication and Generic EAP Method Extension

   In some cases the peer will not have a way to verify a server
   certificate and in some cases a server might not have a certificate
   to verify. Therefore, it is desirable to support certificate-less
   authentication. An application for this is credential provisioning
   where the peer and server authenticate each other with a shared
   password and credentials for subsequent authentication (e.g. a key
   pair and certificate or a shared key) can be passed inside the
tunnel.
   Another application is to extend existing strong EAP methods with
   new features such as channel bindings.  

   Great care must be taken when attempting to perform certificate-less
   authentication. One way of doing it is to establish the tunnel
   without full server or client verification 
   and inside the tunnel use an EAP method that performs
   mutual authentication and key derivation. If this technique is used
   the inner EAP method MUST provide resistance to dictionary attack
   and a cryptographic binding between the inner method and the
   tunnel method MUST be established.  In addition the cipher suite used
to 
   establish the tunnel MUST derive the master key using contribution
from
   both client and server, as in ephemeral Diffie-Hellman cipher suites.

   The tunnel method MAY allow for certificate-less authentication."