IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ace] Agenda

Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> Tue, 15 July 2014 08:18 UTC

Return-Path: <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
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 7219C1B2838 for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 01:18:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 mY2hkk38diC5 for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 01:18:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F7811B2836 for <ace@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 01:18:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.254.119] ([80.92.116.212]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MgL1q-1WtAPc0OCE-00Nesd; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 10:18:26 +0200
Message-ID: <53C4E3D1.7020804@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 10:18:25 +0200
From: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Likepeng <likepeng@huawei.com>, Ludwig Seitz <ludwig@sics.se>, "ace@ietf.org" <ace@ietf.org>
References: <53C398ED.3030302@gmx.net> <53C3D013.6030006@sics.se> <34966E97BE8AD64EAE9D3D6E4DEE36F258177D9A@SZXEMA501-MBS.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <34966E97BE8AD64EAE9D3D6E4DEE36F258177D9A@SZXEMA501-MBS.china.huawei.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2
OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7SFgDeHjEplPG37VVkd1xKxGLBbaWhiuP"
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:gdoJ5/OTjc65mcENbax149JpUPRVTd1dPOkdDpd7O6vn1oM/Ke6 mCbjPWKOVlkNQXSxzE8DxS6RUTPKYcRmDLS+yuDGgMuKaFWAN/XlccgpqUnFQyeSP9q8axx GsFICXlFUia7vaY/05OGxBwYtC5EppaZ44/0Tg+JJ2w6tX6DokUJ0Dppnx/UYXFViWLKP5U DNASOySNXarB6uWc+JNWw==
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ace/eIv0OTnyNnWWbDr-Qx_QRCouLLA
Subject: Re: [Ace] Agenda
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: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:18:37 -0000


On 07/15/2014 02:39 AM, Likepeng wrote:
>> I think this question (3c) is too generic. If we ask like that, we will just reiterate
>> > the discussions currently ongoing on the DICE list (see the "Tyranny of the
>> > Lightswitch" thread).
> We can go a little bit further:
> - long-term key established between the client and the authorization server
> - long-term key established between the authorization server and the resource server
> - short term key established between the client and the resource server

The discussion on the DICE list was useful and of course the issues
surface also in this group.

If we could only figure out how to make any progress on that topic this
would be useful. Any ideas?

Ciao
Hannes

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email