IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Anima] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-22: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 18 July 2019 23:31 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0205A120115; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 16:31:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 2G3SURYTAzh5; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 16:31:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 627EB120106; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 16:31:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BC803808A; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 19:31:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E26571B; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 19:31:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
cc: draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra@ietf.org, tte+ietf@cs.fau.de, anima-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, anima@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <d9374cbb-5462-4736-b895-287b8e18450c@www.fastmail.com>
References: <156285123896.32459.15810474411321920381.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <29770.1563061936@dooku.sandelman.ca> <d9374cbb-5462-4736-b895-287b8e18450c@www.fastmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 19:31:09 -0400
Message-ID: <9598.1563492669@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/M7PA6oAuwv0B_ou1h2pTAl8udRU>
Subject: Re: [Anima] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-22: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 23:31:12 -0000

Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm> wrote:
    >> The advice we got from the .well-known expert was that we should have
    >> this document Updates: RFC7030, and that the /est entry in the
    >> registry should say "RFC7030, RFCXXXX".  Will this be enough rather
    >> than create a new registry?  We think that no other /.well-known has a
    >> registry.
    >> 
    >> Tell us which way to go.

    > I think the answer depends on whether you want to have an easy way of
    > finding second level URI path components under "est". I personally
    > prefer a new registry, but I understand that it might be a bit more
    > work in the document.

I prefer Updates: 7030.


-- 
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email