I spent a fair amount of time talking to people about this draft
during the Stockholm IETF meeting. The whole debate about standards
track vs. informational began due to an error on my part. The
authors requested publication on the standards track, but I processed
the document for informational without realizing my mistake until the
heated discussion began on the mail list. Based on the conversations
in Stockholm, it is clear to me that a Last Call for standards track
would have resulted in the same heated debate.
At this point in time, all standards track EAP methods have gone
through the EMU WG. The Security ADs have recommended that this
approach is desirable to ensure that there is sufficient review.
The EMU WG does not have a work item in their charter that would
accommodate this document. The Security ADs are not willing to
recharter the EMU WG to add such and item until further progress is
made on the existing work items.
Many people expressed concerns about implementation. So far, there
is no indication that the EAP-pwd will be implemented by anyone
beyond the authors. If others are planning to do so, please let me know.
Given this situation, I am willing to continue to sponsor the
document as informational (or experimental, if the authors
prefer). I'm willing to consider progression to the standards track
in the future if there is uptake in the community.
Russ
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf