Re: [Ace] How to specify DTLS MTI in COAP-EST

TBH, I'm not a fan of SHOULD+, etc., and they're pretty alien to TLS, so
you should just use words if you want to convey these points.

With that said, I don't really understand the objective here: we're
generally moving towards the CFRG curves, so what's the reasoning for the
P256 MUST and why do you think that will change.

-Ekr

On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
wrote:

>
> Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@arm.com> wrote:
>     > why don't you just reference https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7925?
>
> Ignorance :-)
> Thank you, I think that we will reference it then;
>
> Section 4.4 includes:
>
>         At the time of writing, the
>         recommended curve is secp256r1, and the use of uncompressed points
>         follows the recommendation in CoAP.  Note that standardization for
>         Curve25519 (for ECDHE) is ongoing (see [RFC7748]), and support for
>         this curve will likely be required in the future.
>
> which is what we want to say anyway.
>
>     > I am not a big fan of making all sorts of different crypto
>     > recommendations in our specs that differ slightly.
>
> --
> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh
> networks [
> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network
> architect  [
> ]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on
> rails    [
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ace mailing list
> Ace@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
>
>