Subject: [Emu] Consensus call on EAP Tunneled method

From: Alan DeKok <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 14:29:41 +0200

For people who didn't attend the EMU meeting at IETF, please answer
the following consensus call:

Question 1: Are you ready to make a decision on the EAP tunneled method?

  Please indicate Yes or No.

Question 2: If the answer to Question 1 is "Yes", please indicate
support for one of the two proposed methods:

	FASTv2
or
	EAP-Team

  Alan DeKok.
  EMU Co-Chair

---

From: Stephen McCann <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 14:19:46 +0100

Alan,

Q1: Yes
Q2: FASTv2

Kind regards

Stephen McCann
Research in Motion

On 30 March 2011 13:29, Alan DeKok <[email-masked]> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Emu mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
>

---

From: Stephen Hanna <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:37:45 -0400

Alan,

Could you set a deadline for these comments?

Thanks,

Steve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
> Alan DeKok
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 8:30 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [Emu] Consensus call on EAP Tunneled method
>

---

From: Hao Zhou <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:50:24 -0400

Q1: Yes.
Q2: FASTv2

---

From: Alan DeKok <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 18:44:13 +0200

> Could you set a deadline for these comments?

  Thursday April 14.  That gives us 2 weeks, which is usual for a
consensus call.

  Alan DeKok.

---

From: Qin Wu <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 11:14:10 +0200

Q1:Yes
Q2:  I support using EAP-Team since it more fits for requrements defined in I-D.ietf-emu-eaptunnel-req.