Subject: [eap] Proposed Resolution to Issue 62: Accept

From: [email-masked] (Bernard Aboba)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 22:33:04 -0800 (PST)

> The following text I found in section 4.1 seems not always mandating
> silent discard for invalid packets.
>
>    If a peer receives a valid duplicate Request for which it has already
>    sent a Response, it MUST resend its original Response. If a peer
>    receives a duplicate Request before it has sent a Response to a valid
>    initial Request (i.e. it's waiting for user input), it MUST silently
>    discard the duplicate Request. An EAP message may be found invalid
>    for a variety of reasons: failed link layer CRC or checksum,
>    malformed EAP packet, EAP method-specific MIC, etc.

How about this?

   If a peer receives a valid duplicate Request for which it has already
   sent a Response, it MUST resend its original Response.  If a peer
   receives a duplicate Request before it has sent a Response, but after
   it has determined the initial Request to be valid (i.e.  it is wait-
   ing for user input), it MUST silently discard the duplicate Request.
   An EAP message may be found invalid for a variety of reasons: failed
   lower layer CRC or checksum, malformed EAP packet, EAP method MIC
   failure, etc.

---

From: [email-masked] (Yoshihiro Ohba)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 07:50:13 -0500

This looks fine with me.

Thanks,
Yoshihiro Ohba

On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 10:33:04PM -0800, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> eap mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap
>