[6tisch] changes to draft-richardson-enrollment-roadmap-01.txt

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 07 February 2018 18:52 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 742871270B4; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 10:52:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.911
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 gyZWtB_nduD4; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 10:52:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9B42124239; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 10:52:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68415200A3; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 13:59:16 -0500 (EST)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5098980E6E; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 13:52:42 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: iot-dir <iot-dir@ietf.org>
CC: anima@ietf.org, 6tisch@ietf.org, ace@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <151802189682.4857.6673059210006508673.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <151802189682.4857.6673059210006508673.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7-RC3; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2018 13:52:42 -0500
Message-ID: <8323.1518029562@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6tisch/yOYp6fvTtFqxYdTTeYV1vSLIzPA>
Subject: [6tisch] changes to draft-richardson-enrollment-roadmap-01.txt
X-BeenThere: 6tisch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discuss link layer model for Deterministic IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e, and impacts on RPL and 6LoWPAN such as resource allocation" <6tisch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6tisch>, <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/6tisch/>
List-Post: <mailto:6tisch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch>, <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2018 18:52:46 -0000

Htmlized:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-richardson-enrollment-roadmap-01
diff:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-richardson-enrollment-roadmap-01


I posted an -01 of the enrollment roadmap document.  The intro says:

  There are numerous mechanisms being proposed to solve the problem
  of securely introducing a new devices into an existing managed network.

  This document provides an overview of the different mechanisms showing what
  technologies are common.  The document starts with a diagram showing the
  various components and how they go together to form five enrollment
  scenarios.

The work crosses many groups, but does not fit into any of them.

The document might be good as a way to keep track of things, but may not be
worth publishing.
Yes, could go the wiki way, but I find it significantly less satisfying.

In particular I'd like to include guidance on why one process vs another,
which I think would be worth preserving.
On the other hand, there are sections explaining which documents are of
cross-WG interest, and if they have been adopted in any place (or not!!).
That's really ephermeral information that doesn't belong in an RFC until it's
been resolved.

It would also be nice to have a different name than "Transition to
Constrained Enrollment" that more accurately reflected the interests of that
group of deployers (it includes Lighting/Fairhair, and
electricity-AMI/Itron/Cisco.)

If there are those who want to review/contribute to it,
https://github.com/anima-wg/enrollment-roadmap.git  might be the best place
to send pull requests.  I'm personally not enthralled by using github issues
for discussion (I prefer email lists), but I don't object to it.

If there is interest in publishing it, my suggestion is to use iot-dir
to get some beef into it, and then submit as an AD-sponsored document.
Alternatively saag.

I think that the document should expand by about 4 pages of discussion, and
then sit in stasis for awhile.

The most significant change in -01 is that I changed how the boxes around
the ascii art diagram are rendered.   I hope that it is more readable that
way.  {If you haven't tried "asciio", I suggest you try it out.}

Other than that, more text in the sections.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-