Identity Selection Hints for the Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 14 and is now closed.
(Margaret Cullen) Yes
(Brian Carpenter) No Objection
Comment (2005-05-23 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
Review comments from Spencer Dawkins: ...it occurred to me to wonder why this draft wouldn't be published as an Experimental RFC, since it changes the bits on the wire in a Proposed Standard, it's useful but has some scaling problems,... ...a couple of editorial comments. In the Abstract - "EAP peer" may not be common usage. Is there any clarifying text that could be added to the first sentence? In the "Security considerations" section, first paragraph, it would be nice to explain a little more about what the peer does when it treats the NAIRealms attribute as a hint.
(Ted Hardie) No Objection
(Russ Housley) No Objection
(David Kessens) No Objection
(Bert Wijnen) (was Discuss) No Objection
citation in abstract (fomrally not allowed by RFC-Ed) possibly The reference to RFC 2234 could be updated to point to draft-crocker-abnf-rfc2234bis instead. It's in the RFC Editor queue.