Subject: RE: [Isms] Late Surprise: EAP is not appropriate for ISMS (fwd)

From: "Fleischman, Eric" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 17:21:36 -0800

Would it be appropriate for the WG as a whole to officially articulate
our requirements and evaluation criteria before the evaluation committee
is formed?

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Hornstein [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 11:24 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Isms] Late Surprise: EAP is not appropriate for ISMS (fwd)

Greetings all.

Eric Fleischman had asked earlier on the mailing list how we (the WG
chairs) expected to achieve our milestones since we weren't close to
consensus on the proposals.  I said that we were having a teleconference
with our sheperding AD soon, and I wanted to wait until we had that
teleconference until I said more.

We had that teleconference today, and the results were surprising.  Sam
drafted the following note after the conference and has given me
permission to forward his note to the mailing list.  You can read his
note below, but I'll summarize now:

- EAP is not an appropriate protocol to use to authenticate SNMP, based
  on the EAP applicability statement (see sec 1.3 of RFC 3748).
- His recommendation is to re-consider the evaluation of the propsals
  based on this new information.
- The most productive route in his opinion is to consider solutions not
  based on EAP.
- The delay caused by this won't be held against the working group.

So .... where does that leave us?

I'd like to hear from WG members, but to me this means we might want to
restart the evaluation team process again.  This would mean that the
proposal authors would have another chance to change their proposals
significantly to address objections raised by the evaluation team.  But
we don't necessarily have to do the evaluation team process again (I
personally think it would be worthwhile to do the eval team process
again).

Anyway, I suspect it's going to be an interesting meeting in
Minneapolis. I apologize to all WG participants, but due to work
committments I won't be able to make it (I hope to participate via
Jabber).

--Ken

_______________________________________________
Isms mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms