[Anima-bootstrap] Anima bootstrap meeting 12-29-2016

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Tue, 29 November 2016 16:07 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
X-Original-To: anima-bootstrap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima-bootstrap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05155129C0D for <anima-bootstrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 08:07:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.695
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.695 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, WEIRD_PORT=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HT6jzJqRIqB7 for <anima-bootstrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 08:07:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7DB61295B5 for <anima-bootstrap@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 08:07:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from faui40p.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40p.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:77]) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B26F58C4B1 for <anima-bootstrap@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 17:07:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: by faui40p.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id 53793B0AFA1; Tue, 29 Nov 2016 17:07:14 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 17:07:14 +0100
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: anima-bootstrap <anima-bootstrap@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20161129160714.GA29503@faui40p.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima-bootstrap/0PUS_aZK5k_wC8zNk9U3vliP-PY>
Subject: [Anima-bootstrap] Anima bootstrap meeting 12-29-2016
X-BeenThere: anima-bootstrap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list for the bootstrap design team of the ANIMA WG <anima-bootstrap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima-bootstrap>, <mailto:anima-bootstrap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima-bootstrap/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima-bootstrap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-bootstrap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima-bootstrap>, <mailto:anima-bootstrap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 16:07:22 -0000

On the etherpad - http://etherpad.tools.ietf.org:9000/p/anima-boostrapping?useMonospaceFont=true

I read the following. Wondering when that meeting was.


    present: mcr, max, kent.
    1) ownership-voucher.
    MCR talks about having read about CWT (CBOR version of JWT), and also the cose-message format which is used to sign CWT.
    CWT would express the voucher YANG definition directly.
    YANG has been used for a transactional protocol, but not been listed for something at REST.
    Kent says it is exactly what would happen if you fetched it with GET... 
    parking the question: "how do we deal with the encoding"
    2) which working group should take this on.
    It will be ANIMA, and we will create new github group.
    3) bearer token discussion.
    We don't want to standardize a mechanism where a New Node/Pledge would directly accept such a voucher.