>>>>> "Yoshihiro" == Yoshihiro Ohba <yohba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
e email discussion over
Yoshihiro> the EAP mailing list quoted below, I had a short
Yoshihiro> conversation on this issue with Jesse Walker during
Yoshihiro> IEEE 802 interim meeting in January in order to
Yoshihiro> follow-up the email discussion and understand the input
Yoshihiro> from Jesse more. As far as I understand, he seemed to
Yoshihiro> agree on this possible interpretation while he
Yoshihiro> mentioned that there is no existing 802.11i
Yoshihiro> implementation that uses 802.1X Uncontrolled Port for
Yoshihiro> non-802.1X frame exchange, but I may be still
Yoshihiro> misunderstanding something. Also, for the sake of
Yoshihiro> completeness of the email discussion over the EAP
Yoshihiro> mailing list, the following email that I sent in
Yoshihiro> response to msg03872 should be quoted as well:
Yoshihiro> http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/eap/msg03879.html.]
So, the implementability of our specifications is a significant
concern. If we do not expect there to be environments in which a
feature of our spec will be implementable, then we should remove that
feature.
Implementability is sufficiently important that RFC 2026 explicitly
gives the IESG the ability to request an implementation report even
for publication at proposed standard when it has questions about
whether a particular feature can be implemented interoperably.
--Sam
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf