Subject: Re: [Nea] Verifying consensus on next steps re TLS/TCP-based PT

From: "Susan Thomson (sethomso)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 16:46:59 -0500

I counted 5 responses to the consensus check question on next steps re
the L3-based PT protocols. All responded in the affirmative.

I declare consensus to merge the TLS/TCP-based protocols into one
submission as described. The co-authors can go ahead with publishing a
merged proposal.

Thanks
Susan

-----Original Message-----
From: Susan Thomson (sethomso) 
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 9:16 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Verifying consensus on next steps re TLS/TCP-based PT

At IETF80, there was a discussion on next steps regarding the individual
submissions for a TLS/TCP-based PT, and an EAP-based PT.

Specifically, there are 2 proposals for a TLS/TCP-based transport
documented in the following I-Ds:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sangster-nea-pt-tls-02.txt 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-cam-winget-eap-tlv-03.txt

At the meeting, there was unanimous consensus to merge the TLS/TCP
proposals in the above I-Ds as follows:
- Support client authentication using the SASL framework
- Support vendor extensions
- Support error handling

The authors of the above I-Ds have agreed to work on a joint WG
submission.

The chairs would like to verify this consensus on the mailing 
list. Please review the proposal and respond by Monday, 5pm PT on 
Apr 18. Indicate in your response whether you support the changes. 
If you support the changes, a one word response ("Support") is 
sufficient. If not, please explain your concerns and suggest how 
they could be resolved.

Thanks
Susan
----------------------------

Note: No consensus has yet been reached on the EAP-based proposals, in
particular, whether to use an EAP method or EAP-TLV for carrying posture
information. The next step is to document the strengths and weaknesses
of these 2 approaches to help make a decision.