Does the draft need to update both 5448 and 9048?

emu-wg / eap-aka-pfs

Perfect-Forward Secrecy for EAP-AKA' PFS

0 stars 2 forks source link

Does the draft need to update both 5448 and 9048? #33

Closed jariarkko closed 2 years ago

jariarkko commented 2 years ago

... since 9048 did not obsolete 5448

emanjon commented 2 years ago

That is is good question. I changed "updates" from RFC 5448 to RFC 9048 as the document do not even mention RFC 5448 except in the Acknowledgments.

Updating increases visability and makes it easier to find the EAP-AKA'-FS document. If it updates 5448 some more mentioning of 5448 would be needed in the introduction

jariarkko commented 2 years ago

Closing, fix merged to the document.