IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [6tisch-security] minimal security draft

peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl> Fri, 10 February 2017 08:12 UTC

Return-Path: <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
X-Original-To: 6tisch-security@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6tisch-security@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8C0E1297C1 for <6tisch-security@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:12:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.621
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.621 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nxDbSARXzGNT for <6tisch-security@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:12:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lb3-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net (lb3-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net [194.109.24.30]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C5211294FB for <6tisch-security@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:12:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from webmail.xs4all.nl ([IPv6:2001:888:0:22:194:109:20:215]) by smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net with ESMTP id iwCT1u00T13if5201wCT7R; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 09:12:27 +0100
Received: from AMontpellier-654-1-241-185.w92-133.abo.wanadoo.fr ([92.133.12.185]) by webmail.xs4all.nl with HTTP (HTTP/1.1 POST); Fri, 10 Feb 2017 09:12:27 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 09:12:27 +0100
From: peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
To: Mališa Vučinić <malisa.vucinic@inria.fr>
Organization: vanderstok consultancy
Mail-Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org
In-Reply-To: <6D6AE790-1234-403B-9429-992B4E168AF3@inria.fr>
References: <1f99708ffbacaa7235d05b535f669291@xs4all.nl> <6D6AE790-1234-403B-9429-992B4E168AF3@inria.fr>
Message-ID: <b74505c6337fc3c3036b399940feea2a@xs4all.nl>
X-Sender: stokcons@xs4all.nl
User-Agent: XS4ALL Webmail
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6tisch-security/ojFe8Qc6TEJlNLbUpfSycN2ccmk>
Cc: 6tisch Security <6tisch-security@ietf.org>, consultancy@vanderstok.org
Subject: Re: [6tisch-security] minimal security draft
X-BeenThere: 6tisch-security@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org
List-Id: Extended Design Team for 6TiSCH security architecture <6tisch-security.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6tisch-security>, <mailto:6tisch-security-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/6tisch-security/>
List-Post: <mailto:6tisch-security@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6tisch-security-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch-security>, <mailto:6tisch-security-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 08:12:31 -0000

Hi Malisa,

thanks for the info.
> 
> For the content-format question, doesn’t it suffice to use
> application/cbor as content type? I don’t have much experience with
> content-format registration so please correct me if I am missing
> something.
> 
When several applications use the same format, it is better to define it 
at one place.
est-coaps probably wants to transport the same keys in the same format.
Also in the future, new formats can be added without changing the 
bootstrap protocol.

If you agree, I may do a proposal.

Peter

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email