Subject: [eap] schedule for SM draft for Vienna

From: [email-masked] (John Vollbrecht)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:44:20 -0400

--On Monday, June 16, 2003 9:19 PM -0400 Nick Petroni <[email-masked]> 
wrote:

>
> What do you envision as the schedule from here on? I am heading back to
> the UK on Weds and will be working remotely a few days next week. I think
> the deadline for Vienna drafts is June 30 so I think we should aim to get
> an -04 by next friday if that is our goal.  Let me know what you think.
>

Nick - thanks for the heads up.

I would like to have a clean version of the SM doc by the end of next week. 
I think there are a few issues remaining.  I will list the ones I am aware 
of - we do not have a tracking mechanism as Bernard has set up for 2284bis, 
so we will need to rely on memory some.  I think we should have one more 
conf call - perhaps next week sometime to be sure we are all ok.

The issues I know of are

1. Need to show how method can silently discard Notify Req if is so 
constituted.  (Sec. 5.2 of 2284bis)

2. Success and Fail need to return something (eapNoResp) so lower layer can 
finish (Jim Burns)

3. Expanded NAK MUST NOT be sent in a REQ (Pasi Erronen - is this fixed?)

4. Yoshihiro Ohba's issues (memo 6-3)  - I will respond and we can do email 
for a bit of this.  Perhaps Pasi has a suggestion.

Please list any other issues.  Jari - I think yours have been covered, and 
I think most of Pasi's have been covered.  Please note if some have been 
missed.

Finally, I would like to talk about add on docs.  I think Pasi's 
description of issues could be a good start.  It might be part of or 
different from a description of how tunnelled methods are constructed and 
used.  Pasi has thought about a "tunnelled" EAP state machine which might 
be part of this.  I think such a document or documents are useful in 
conjunction with 2284bis and SM.    Discussion is welcome.