IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Acme] ACME signature mechanics

Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Thu, 18 December 2014 14:11 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F0391A8A12 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 06:11:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 rAXHqfai59Wl for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 06:11:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lb0-x22d.google.com (mail-lb0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C382D1A89B5 for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 06:11:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lb0-f173.google.com with SMTP id z12so1017912lbi.4 for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 06:11:43 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Myqtoc5OxbLXw0kapBFPhH0fawPbLt+ER3s7k4gonJ4=; b=s1XpwLY0il5G0XCxMjW0yqEBCKmVZb49m4Jk8UtnSJo9QoQaAMVQwsJKW8DKtS6u80 2e5N/HYjAUOH8QrMhScmtjESU6pymHR3rOCq7WGgDalPF5yTA8Y9FtalJoOeq4OXXXzS 2f5goSRg2D9nhKRzNQTVg99B9ynTG4mWmbu5dhFXOsqeGC2ytbEQbRovUYGj1GYpR5N1 IKUYBa+WMlM6Jc0E02UFuyBupc8IUeg4am0R6igRiqhvaw/pbme9tkIaEoGhO/Bc5n9I oCTmXX3eK2YuET7rAkQP3e0io6JdY3Jv3fejnD3GqVVuqgMItO/ZVOxO8X69YLrVN8bJ iGjw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.27.133 with SMTP id t5mr2459947lbg.45.1418911903244; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 06:11:43 -0800 (PST)
Sender: hallam@gmail.com
Received: by 10.112.19.42 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 06:11:43 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <5492D548.4010709@gmx.net>
References: <548FF9E3.1020703@gmail.com> <CAL02cgT9iYqtX2Ui5XQYnj=yeF_QnSkKn-jE0D5d56WMzB5bBg@mail.gmail.com> <CAMm+LwjwG0dPTkByu5WZ_ev3xNxAMwunoc-A_VK4sKPSZXRYDw@mail.gmail.com> <006c01d01a33$2b086890$811939b0$@icloud.com> <CABkgnnWGQarDzpx-3f488OF2w3eyTV1iUr4GWyND+_avRHNZ6w@mail.gmail.com> <004901d01a94$55e9ebe0$01bdc3a0$@icloud.com> <54928827.9030009@gmail.com> <CAMm+Lwifqgt9e_i=froACzGW3bsY05KBiJJFBRJrqJcZrEqN8A@mail.gmail.com> <5492CF1B.7010508@gmx.net> <CAMm+LwgL0j-FjsUv4NSonvHcjJLpSB8JUbNNGmRvyqi37B+K7g@mail.gmail.com> <5492D548.4010709@gmx.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 09:11:43 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: SWwdYS0sej8Pwl1Mf-z6i_MhaT8
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwiN9Q8wiP=uLXRtq=f12C=VGwRa_K94u+dcGf+BHxAkfg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
To: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1133b04af5eb71050a7e2b0b"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/IQlTB3URiw7oFCREUVmzQ_vtmRs
Cc: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "acme@ietf.org" <acme@ietf.org>, Trevor Freeman <trevor.freeman99@icloud.com>, Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Acme] ACME signature mechanics
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Automated Certificate Management Environment <acme.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/acme/>
List-Post: <mailto:acme@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:11:54 -0000

On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:23 AM, Hannes Tschofenig <
hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Phillip,
>
> we already have a mechanism for issuing certificates to embedded
> devices, namely OMA Lightweight M2M. It is already used today.
> That specification is a version of the OMA device management protocol
> (which is also widely used) but uses different protocols that are more
> suitable for the embedded side, such as CoAP and JSON.
>
> Hence, I doubt that this work is something the IoT community is asking for.


Is there a pointer to the spec that is publicly accessible?

In the short term that might be the case. But in the longer term IoT is not
going to be a special case of the Internet, it is going to be the Internet.

I think you are making a case for looking at the OMA protocol and deciding
if we can use it.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email