Lakshminath,
If a type code is going to be allocated anyway, it makes perfect sense
to have the protocol documented in an RFC.
OK.
Procedurally, I am curious about the experimental status however,
given that the general mode of operation on EAP methods was to
document the method in an informational track RFC.
I admit that this looks somewhat arbitrary choice, and Inf would
have worked too. But here's my rationale: some of the other EAP
methods that are Inf were truly non-research efforts with a very
clear target in the market place and in vendor's products. There's
less clarity on EAP IKEv2's role, it came out of what to me appeared
as a researcher's interest to see if a method can be defined this
way. This is why Exp felt more appropriate, with the experiment
being whether this method finds use in the world.
I will also ask the obligatory :) question:
After the experiment, are we entertaining the possibility of advancing
this work to standards track?
We would consider that for any document. I think its somewhat
unlikely in this case, though. Again, the recommended methods
to use will come out of EMU.
Jari
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf