[Ace] Results of the ACE interop test 2018-05-30
Ludwig Seitz <ludwig.seitz@ri.se> Tue, 05 June 2018 12:33 UTC
Return-Path: <ludwig.seitz@ri.se>
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 4957D131006 for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 05:33:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 qXPnyO0QzEHj for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 05:33:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out11.electric.net (smtp-out11.electric.net [185.38.181.38]) (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 5084C131007 for <ace@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 05:33:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1fQB9e-0004vl-TL by out11d.electric.net with emc1-ok (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <ludwig.seitz@ri.se>) id 1fQB9e-0004xB-UG for ace@ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 05:33:38 -0700
Received: by emcmailer; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 05:33:38 -0700
Received: from [194.218.146.197] (helo=sp-mail-2.sp.se) by out11d.electric.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <ludwig.seitz@ri.se>) id 1fQB9e-0004vl-TL for ace@ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 05:33:38 -0700
Received: from [192.168.0.166] (10.116.0.226) by sp-mail-2.sp.se (10.100.0.162) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1466.3; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 14:33:37 +0200
To: "ace@ietf.org" <ace@ietf.org>
From: Ludwig Seitz <ludwig.seitz@ri.se>
Message-ID: <d096260d-1006-5e66-2236-271ab6f21842@ri.se>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 14:33:37 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.116.0.226]
X-ClientProxiedBy: sp-mail-2.sp.se (10.100.0.162) To sp-mail-2.sp.se (10.100.0.162)
X-Outbound-IP: 194.218.146.197
X-Env-From: ludwig.seitz@ri.se
X-Proto: esmtps
X-Revdns:
X-HELO: sp-mail-2.sp.se
X-TLS: TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256:128
X-Authenticated_ID:
X-PolicySMART: 14510320
X-Virus-Status: Scanned by VirusSMART (c)
X-Virus-Status: Scanned by VirusSMART (s)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ace/pSyMAOsgWpZLda5j07l_rGBfJe0>
Subject: [Ace] Results of the ACE interop test 2018-05-30
X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 12:33:44 -0000
Hello ACE, we held an interop on the implementations of draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz and draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize on May 30th. We had 3 participants and some attendees that just listened in. The implementations we tested were: * ACE-Java by Ludwig Seitz (me), RISE SICS https://bitbucket.org/lseitz/ace-java * A client by SEI lab of CMU based on some of the ACE-Java code * Jim Schaad's C# implementation https://github.com/jimsch/Oauth-Authz (Jim is that correct?) The tests we planned to execute can be found here: https://github.com/ace-wg/ace-oauth/blob/master/InteropTestPlan.txt The results can be found here: https://github.com/ace-wg/ace-oauth/blob/master/AceInterop2018-05-30.xls Note that I have heard of several more implementations, which couldn't make it for that first interop, namely: - A constrained RS implementation by SEI lab of CMU - A constrained (client/RS?) implementation by TZI, University of Bremen - A commercial implementation by ARM I think it would be nice for the group if the authors of the libraries above could say a quick word about the status of their respective implementations. Kind regards, Ludwig Seitz -- Ludwig Seitz, PhD Security Lab, RISE SICS Phone +46(0)70-349 92 51
- [Ace] Results of the ACE interop test 2018-05-30 Ludwig Seitz