Subject: [Emu] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-emu-eap-session-id-04: (with COMMENT)

From: Barry Leiba via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2020 19:54:44 -0700

Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-emu-eap-session-id-04: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-emu-eap-session-id/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

— Section 2 —

   This section updates [RFC5247] ...
   It further
   defines Session-ID derivation for PEAP.

This section does not address PEAP; that’s done in Section 3.  I suggest
removing that last sentence.

— Section 3 —

   [RFC5247] did not define Session-Id definition for Microsoft's
   Protected EAP (PEAP).  For consistency with EAP-TLS the definition
   given in [RFC5216] Section 2.3, we define it as:

Both sentences here need some fixing:

NEW
   [RFC5247] did not define Session-Id for Microsoft's
   Protected EAP (PEAP).  For consistency with the EAP-TLS definition
   given in [RFC5216] Section 2.3, we define it as:
END

---

From: Alan DeKok <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2020 09:06:51 -0400

> removing that last sentence.

  Done.

>   given in [RFC5216] Section 2.3, we define it as:

  Done.

  Thanks.

  Alan DeKok.