Re: [Ace] Warren Kumari's No Record on draft-ietf-ace-extend-dtls-authorize-06: (with COMMENT)

[Warren Kumari <[e-mail]>]

Awesome, thank you!

W


On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 3:05 PM, John Mattsson <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> We have submitted draft-ietf-ace-extend-dtls-authorize-07. This version
> addresses all comments received from OpsDir and IESG.
>
>
>
> - Expanded the terms ACE, CoAP, TLS, DTLS, OSCORE, AS, RS as suggested by
> OpsDir and John Scudder.
>
> - Added some info on the ACE framework (RFC9200) including the information
> that both the Client and the RS may be constrained. This addresses the
> comments from Paul Wouters, Zaheduzzaman Sarker, and John Scudder
>
> - Explained what DTLS is used for. This addresses the comment from Lars
> Eggert.
>
> - Removed the sentences "The client can try TLS and DTLS in parallel to
> accelerate the connection setup. It is up to the implementation to handle
> the case where the RS reponds to both connection requests." This addresses
> the comments from Erik Kline, Warren Kumari, and OpsDir.
>
> - Added "Non-constrained Clients and Resource Servers SHOULD support both
> TLS and DTLS.". This addresses comments from Paul Wouters, Robert Wilton,
> and Zaheduzzaman Sarker.
>
> - Fixed all nits found by IESG.
>
>
> Diff:           https://author-tools.ietf.org/
> iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-ace-extend-dtls-authorize-07
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
> *From: *Warren Kumari via Datatracker <[e-mail]>
> *Date: *Wednesday, 15 February 2023 at 15:27
> *To: *The IESG <[e-mail]>
> *Cc: *[e-mail] <
> [e-mail]>, [e-mail] <
> [e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <
> [e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, yingzhen.
> [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]
> >
> *Subject: *Warren Kumari's No Record on
> draft-ietf-ace-extend-dtls-authorize-06: (with COMMENT)
>
> Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-ace-extend-dtls-authorize-06: No Record
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/
> handling-ballot-positions/
> for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-extend-dtls-authorize/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thanks to Yingzhen Qu for the helpful OpsDir review:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/
> review-ietf-ace-extend-dtls-authorize-06-opsdir-lc-qu-2023-02-09/
>
> I encourage the authors to review this, and respond to the "In case both
> the
> client and server support both TLS and DTLS, it says here “It is up to the
> implementation to handle”. However it also says “the client typically first
> tries using DTLS”, this seems to give priority to DTLS. Please clarify."
>