Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization
Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Wed, 31 October 2018 15:43 UTC
Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A753F130DDF
for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 08:43:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Quarantine-ID: <gdvfrGjypqSH>
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER SECTION, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char 9C hex):
Received: ...s kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)\n\t\234by outgoing.mit[...]
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001,
UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 gdvfrGjypqSH for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Wed, 31 Oct 2018 08:43:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-5.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-5.mit.edu
[18.7.68.34])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BDC6130DE5
for <ace@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 08:43:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 12074422-de7ff700000025ff-8c-5bd9cd8aaae9
Received: from mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.35])
(using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
(Client did not present a certificate)
by dmz-mailsec-scanner-5.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id
87.73.09727.A8DC9DB5; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 11:43:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH-1.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.11])
by mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.9.2) with ESMTP id w9VFh5LK028906;
Wed, 31 Oct 2018 11:43:05 -0400
Received: from kduck.kaduk.org (24-107-191-124.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com [24.107.191.124])
(authenticated bits=56)
(User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id w9VFh114013495
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT);
Wed, 31 Oct 2018 11:43:03 -0400
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 10:43:01 -0500
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: Salvador =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E9rez?= <salvador.p.f@um.es>
Cc: ace@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20181031154300.GK45914@kduck.kaduk.org>
References: <B7A91B0B-5672-48D9-85A6-B8A8135305AC@um.es>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <B7A91B0B-5672-48D9-85A6-B8A8135305AC@um.es>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmpgleLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42IR4hRV1u0+ezPa4Pk3EYvv33qYLZpXXWV3
YPJYsuQnk8e5l20sAUxRXDYpqTmZZalF+nYJXBlPHuxhK5grUPFp4W6mBsY1vF2MnBwSAiYS
vzrus4HYQgJrmCS2HQroYuQCsjcySjxe/IEdwrnLJDHl6zN2kCoWAVWJw1t+gNlsAioSDd2X
mUFsEQEribPzj7B2MXJwMAsISHy4ngQSFhbQkNjYtRWsnBdoWf+VaWwgJUICFhLL9+RAhAUl
Ts58wgJiMwuoS/yZd4kZYoq0xPJ/HBBheYnmrbPBFnEKWErsejEDzBYVUJbY23eIfQKj4Cwk
k2YhmTQLYdIsJJMWMLKsYpRNya3SzU3MzClOTdYtTk7My0st0jXVy80s0UtNKd3ECApodhel
HYwT/3kdYhTgYFTi4X2QfCNaiDWxrLgy9xCjJAeTkijvybqb0UJ8SfkplRmJxRnxRaU5qcWH
GCU4mJVEeL8fBcrxpiRWVqUW5cOkpDlYlMR5J7YsjhYSSE8sSc1OTS1ILYLJynBwKEnwHjoD
1ChYlJqeWpGWmVOCkGbi4AQZzgM0/DpIDW9xQWJucWY6RP4Uo6KUOK8NSEIAJJFRmgfXC0o4
Etn7a14xigO9IszrC1LFA0xWcN2vgAYzAQ3mYr8BMrgkESEl1cCYHhAw0/rKlHz1QtG7lzfb
tcgZlM48//lPv8JLowmZnPPXyl9rV9Q0d5n6b3Hv7+ApPl5bp2+rcz9Y89qz482tJ09LFRTn
Jt4u8Trk5SXzsKLVW2hNdLBzDU9y+qxrfev7uKd8mix4NSv68OPJj9fsXeLNV/3q0y1GJd2n
Qtc0taJvzrXcJHxRiaU4I9FQi7moOBEA2gUECBMDAAA=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ace/GlApH2x8pe5mDDcWFbZksJmz5t4>
Subject: Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization
X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 15:43:17 -0000
Hi Salvador, On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:12:54AM +0100, Salvador Pérez wrote: > Hello authors of EDHOC, > > we have implemented a previous version of EDHOC (draft-selander-ace-cose-ecdhe) and want to share some experiences. > > Our work so far has focused on implementation and evaluation of version -08 of EDHOC over CoAP using real IoT hardware. The obtained results show a significant performance improvement compared to other key establishment protocols, such as DTLS handshake (version 1.2), especially with respect to length and number of exchanged messages. Are your results written up anywhere? It would be great to see more details of the comparison and the actual numbers. Unfortunately, I don't think that DTLS 1.2 is the best comparison -- DTLS 1.3 should be seen as the current "state of the art" for DTLS, and is expected to itself be leaner than DTLS 1.2, which might wash out some of the results you've seen here. Thanks, Ben > We have reviewed version -10 and noted the reduction of message length. Based on our experience, we propose that also removing the overhead due to security parameter negotiation could be an important optimization, and relevant in many use cases where these parameters are available through an out-of-band process. > > Accordingly and taking into account that EDHOC provides a basic security functionality for any context where security needs to be enabled, we are currently considering the application of this protocol in different IoT deployments, such as LoRaWAN networks, OSCORE-enabled scenarios or its integration with capabilities. We therefore would like to see the progress of EDHOC in standardization. > > Kind regards, > > -------------------- > Salvador Pérez > PhD student in "Future Internet Networks: Infrastructure and Security” > Faculty of Computer Science - University of Murcia > Email: salvador.p.f@um.es > Skype: salva.pf > > _______________________________________________ > Ace mailing list > Ace@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
- [Ace] EDHOC standardization Salvador Pérez
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Salvador Pérez
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Rene Struik
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Antonio Skarmeta
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Michael Richardson
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization John Mattsson
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization John Mattsson
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Michael Richardson
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Göran Selander
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Michael Richardson
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Owen Friel (ofriel)
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Michael Richardson
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization John Mattsson
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization John Mattsson
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Jim Schaad
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization John Mattsson
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization John Mattsson
- [Ace] (protocol flows) Re: [Lwip] EDHOC standar... Rene Struik
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization John Mattsson
- Re: [Ace] EDHOC standardization Hannes Tschofenig
- [Ace] (details on use case scenario?) Re: [Lwip... Rene Struik
- Re: [Ace] (details on use case scenario?) Re: [... Göran Selander
- Re: [Ace] (details on use case scenario?) Re: [... Rene Struik
- Re: [Ace] (details on use case scenario?) Re: [... Rene Struik
- Re: [Ace] (details on use case scenario?) Re: [... Göran Selander
- Re: [Ace] (details on use case scenario?) Re: [... Rene Struik
- Re: [Ace] (details on use case scenario?) Re: [... Göran Selander