Re: [Anima] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-28: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Brian E Carpenter <> Mon, 16 December 2019 22:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E375012093E; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 14:55:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ugkxgtGITVSL; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 14:55:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::429]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30AEE12093C; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 14:55:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id d199so6411900pfd.11; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 14:55:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0ZpWp21jHSNKWvLvBhe8RmWRFimp+uFsUprBcixrD9A=; b=vhKTRHq3GnIxkaK+K0x4a38lTcR9SzI1o7V0rPSQU4MRUClTGctKTlT8KDWI4xjpFm jClwkO3eeMvWoWyAUatuwIeROFRrB2D5FvcmXbeWbqYfklpV2hzxJyyb/Bp5USviLo2q TkjP5eOpnyf8kdGGu2g4ieLoSk7OYGMCMegWXmnevuY+Q/mOqAxwD//Cm8x/k3ELapEA pr31GCYMM0eWJHhMKiLQJ+Pl9H3w7KILQ+4NGhNyzMrXd77u6RjQmx8zXbpWYZtyoRz9 i3e0ojl/HZ3mEOBWEGHzd2F72wgiBr7sgWXWgXbEOi3rK9G/J18QuUJyFTae12kGzo8w JuRQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0ZpWp21jHSNKWvLvBhe8RmWRFimp+uFsUprBcixrD9A=; b=CZpCi65mlzkbl/BzKa0K6XV6uWI4UtqRrFF1ZZfwe3Pe0c2eEPZuNRs/0i/XFpBuEH JnV7WMnHR/e5hq1kEAnOpcNdxs4P3qDClIVyAWCmcaDqET8nlHsp9ttd6+D/f+eYoPqK a1D16oACJ/9af9KWfYcKnmE0Hr07EbY8p+S36nFJ8nJvqBhkp/0KyPN3BPuKjrIXuG3U Bg1f9Og8EGA/vDYZm2+hY0AL4mpEV6dFRLbCkepBk8tQI3tFNQRsk+L7KXgXVUZyum7x vI/MyClmunots6RZWVWdPOKKiDMyk3vR9ItEeFRWHB7T2tyajfXFhrGkkNLtPVYcepzd B3fQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVlA02VNttRU24bxQJTsLHPF6u+TbEMMtK6Ud2tPpIral4uF3RC Wp9E1cF0ebzivF5Js3C8mQJyhYf9
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxaMl4lQ0c3XO2/Am1wVX93M10Jh4XDKjxn/jzNHYkT47KB0rQ7hsxpG3YjVnAuMGKwYXLofA==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:4e0e:: with SMTP id c14mr21242065pgb.237.1576536909119; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 14:55:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ([]) by with ESMTPSA id x65sm20311906pfb.171.2019. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 16 Dec 2019 14:55:08 -0800 (PST)
To: Alissa Cooper <>, Michael Richardson <>
Cc:,, tom petch <>, IESG <>,,
References: <> <9637.1574756997@localhost> <> <20062.1576526178@localhost> <>
From: Brian E Carpenter <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 11:55:01 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Anima] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-28: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 22:55:13 -0000

On 17-Dec-19 09:08, Alissa Cooper wrote:
> Thanks Michael. Should Section 8.1 now be removed as well?

I think that's a good catch.

FYI and largely irrelevant, I did lash together some code at the
IETF106 hackathon using GRASP to communicate a MUD URL to the
network management system. So if we need to integrate MUD handling
into the ANIMA infrastructure, there's already a proof of concept,
without complicating BRSKI.


> Alissa
>> On Dec 16, 2019, at 2:56 PM, Michael Richardson <> wrote:
>> {Hi Tom, I don't quite understand, but I don't seem to get emails directly
>> From you.  Or perhaps it has to do with it being posted through the
>> datatracker.  This is not the first review I have missed in this way.}
>> We had forgotten about the content of Appendix C, which is not normative.
>> It stems from an era when we were not sure how successful RFC8520 will be.
>> I have issued version -31 in which we remove Appendix C rather than fix it.
>> This extension could be added correctly at a later date, and at this point,
>> we don't see the MUD FILE->MASA URL flow as particularly important.
>> Both URLs can be in the IDevID if needed, at the cost of bytes in the IDevID
>> certificate.
>> I think that there are operational problems with embedding the MUD URL in the
>> IDevID relating to firmware upgrades, nor is that related to this appendix.
>> It is not a BRSKI issue, but it does mean that the likelyhood of a MUD URL
>> being the only extension that can be afforded an IDevID is significantly less
>> likely.
>> --
>> Michael Richardson <>, Sandelman Software Works
>> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
> _______________________________________________
> Anima mailing list