Re: [Ace] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ace-usecases-00.txt

Likepeng <likepeng@huawei.com> Fri, 05 December 2014 09:08 UTC

Return-Path: <likepeng@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9B0C1ACE0B for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 01:08:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 Ut71CcFLJdfK for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 01:08:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6855B1A0075 for <Ace@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 01:08:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BMK04380; Fri, 05 Dec 2014 09:08:11 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from SZXEMA411-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.70) by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 09:08:11 +0000
Received: from SZXEMA501-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.142]) by szxema411-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.70]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 17:07:23 +0800
From: Likepeng <likepeng@huawei.com>
To: Ludwig Seitz <ludwig@sics.se>
Thread-Topic: [Ace] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ace-usecases-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHQD8vOGWl/Lr23FUqhltVOP+fPBJyAs+VA
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 09:07:23 +0000
Message-ID: <34966E97BE8AD64EAE9D3D6E4DEE36F2581D1117@SZXEMA501-MBS.china.huawei.com>
References: <20141204135611.7629.62021.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <54806A87.6050707@sics.se>
In-Reply-To: <54806A87.6050707@sics.se>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.63.185.71]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ace/Cy9ddD1nlgF6u1xK_Me0nBU6pTg
Cc: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>, "Ace@ietf.org" <Ace@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ace] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ace-usecases-00.txt
X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" <ace.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ace>, <mailto:ace-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ace/>
List-Post: <mailto:ace@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ace-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace>, <mailto:ace-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 09:08:17 -0000

> Perhaps the WG chairs can give the IETF newbies among us a short overview of
> how the document update procedure is going to be handled from now on?

My experience is that, you need to make updates before each F2F meeting, according to the discussion results received in the mailing list.

Also in each F2F meeting, you need to present the recent changes and open issues for discussion.

According to our milestones, we should finish this document by one or two F2F meetings.

Kind Regards
Kepeng

> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Ace [mailto:ace-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Ludwig Seitz
> 发送时间: 2014年12月4日 22:07
> 收件人: ace@ietf.org
> 主题: [Ace] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ace-usecases-00.txt
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> I have just re-submitted draft-seitz-ace-usecases as draft-ietf-ace-usecases, as
> by the WG chair's instructions.
> 
> Currently the only change is one line added in the acknowledgments.
> However as was stressed in the ACE session at IETF 91, this doesn't mean we
> consider the document to be finished.
> 
> I encourage everyone to review the document and suggest changes and
> improvements, so that we can move forward with it quickly.
> 
> Perhaps the WG chairs can give the IETF newbies among us a short overview of
> how the document update procedure is going to be handled from now on?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ludwig
> 
> 
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ace-usecases-00.txt
> Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 05:56:11 -0800
> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
> To: Mehdi Mani <mehdi.mani@itron.com>, Sandeep Kumar
> <sandeep.kumar@philips.com>, Goeran Selander
> <goran.selander@ericsson.com>, Sandeep S. Kumar
> <sandeep.kumar@philips.com>, Ludwig Seitz <ludwig@sics.se>, Goran
> Selander <goran.selander@ericsson.com>, Stefanie Gerdes <gerdes@tzi.org>,
> Stefanie Gerdes <gerdes@tzi.org>, Ludwig Seitz <ludwig@sics.se>, Mehdi Mani
> <mehdi.mani@itron.com>
> 
> 
> A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-ace-usecases-00.txt has been successfully
> submitted by Ludwig Seitz and posted to the IETF repository.
> 
> Name:		draft-ietf-ace-usecases
> Revision:	00
> Title:		ACE use cases
> Document date:	2014-12-02
> Group:		ace
> Pages:		24
> URL:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ace-usecases-00.txt
> Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-usecases/
> Htmlized:       http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-usecases-00
> 
> 
> Abstract:
>     Constrained devices are nodes with limited processing power, storage
>     space and transmission capacities.  These devices in many cases do
>     not provide user interfaces and are often intended to interact
>     without human intervention.
> 
>     This document comprises a collection of representative use cases for
>     the application of authentication and authorization in constrained
>     environments.  These use cases aim at identifying authorization
>     problems that arise during the lifecylce of a constrained device and
>     are intended to provide a guideline for developing a comprehensive
>     authentication and access control solution for this class of
>     scenarios.
> 
>     Where specific details are relevant, it is assumed that the devices
>     use the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) as communication
>     protocol, however most conclusions apply generally.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> 
> The IETF Secretariat
> 
> 
>