Re: [Ace] [EXTERNAL] Francesca Palombini's Discuss on draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-38: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Mon, 05 July 2021 14:35 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 6255B3A1A03; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 07:35:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 51z-S1TeUDrD; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 07:35:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:32::19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C32D93A19FF; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 07:35:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc89.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4GJSsg2RrVz2xGy; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 16:35:51 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <78BAB6EA-0DDE-4C6C-A923-815E73F1B197@tzi.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2021 16:35:51 +0200
Cc: Ludwig Seitz <ludwig.seitz@combitech.com>, Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>, Cigdem Sengul <cigdem.sengul@gmail.com>, "Apple Inc." <goran.selander@ericsson.com>, "ace-chairs@ietf.org" <ace-chairs@ietf.org>, "ace@ietf.org" <ace@ietf.org>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 647188550.93426-2673e8bcfba9199921d6ca58c63e0984
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F329D30F-EF2A-4BE3-B29A-8425CE44A6D2@tzi.org>
References: <161659738410.3239.3955409176349739508@ietfa.amsl.com> <5634f824f7b14878b5d7d1fdd3b2ed33@combitech.se> <EE1CBB56-8951-473C-A006-875D49BEE350@ericsson.com> <AM0PR0302MB3363E4EB817969E6B34FBBCF9E369@AM0PR0302MB3363.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <F44C49D2-C08E-4C04-A751-05ECBBB1DBA9@tzi.org> <AM0PR0302MB3363C4C6DBD796E67986BD079E369@AM0PR0302MB3363.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <43222AD5-BA56-423F-98C7-65128A6C35B6@tzi.org> <CADZyTknQEYbv=3vo_MfjGeWmJOcU-QfkFua-ZGnFHfXhni=omQ@mail.gmail.com> <3AF922BD-D6D7-4D20-AA39-5E0D5BEC8A29@tzi.org> <a040239b-fc8c-b2a3-c055-481246f4397c@tzi.de> <AM0PR0302MB3363B7DBB026447BE536D61D9E1C9@AM0PR0302MB3363.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <A15462D1-DD0F-4B3C-8C59-7652C6A5F471@ericsson.com> <78BAB6EA-0DDE-4C6C-A923-815E73F1B197@tzi.org>
To: Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ace/OzyDhNBYeOO9kr4nJwqngUfdGDY>
Subject: Re: [Ace] [EXTERNAL] Francesca Palombini's Discuss on draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-38: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
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: Mon, 05 Jul 2021 14:36:00 -0000

On 2021-07-05, at 16:15, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
> 
> The last sentence is kind of obvious (I hope that the same applies to non-combined profiles), but Section 6.7 is short, so a little superfluity does not hurt.

In offline communication, I have been reminded that adding this sentence would appear to be appropriate :-)

NEWNEWNEW:
A profile MAY WANT TO prepare for being combined with others by clearly specifying its security requirements.

(Using an RFC 6919 keyword.)  I wish I didn’t have the strong feeling that this sentence may actually be required.

Grüße, Carsten