Re: [Anima] We want BRSKI and ACP!

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 11 March 2020 17:58 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 78F9A3A0FD7 for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.888
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.888 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, 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 Ngy6YzpFo5WD for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:58:29 -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 173463A0F20 for <anima@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 10:58:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC87338981; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:57:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D214EAE8; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:58:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Anima WG <anima@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAHw9_iKved_kSmL4yd_fgbLqxpGoO=PU4cycuo1Y3wiHGcuk+w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8e18470b-1d6a-19f1-efb2-bc2e72ef2665@gmail.com> <6011.1583935076@localhost> <CAHw9_iKved_kSmL4yd_fgbLqxpGoO=PU4cycuo1Y3wiHGcuk+w@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 25.1.1
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: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:58:24 -0400
Message-ID: <9519.1583949504@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/U7rcdoFDLDX8wUriL-8lCbGtg2Y>
Subject: Re: [Anima] We want BRSKI and ACP!
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: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 17:58:32 -0000

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:
    > Unfortunately, I think there are still some inconsistencies in the
    > examples to resolve:

    > The MASA cert/key is identical to the "manufacturer key pair for IDevID

...

All fixed, Max Pritikin double checked them, which resulted in a sentence of
clarification, which I thought I posted on Monday, but I didn't actually.

I think I did post -37 two weeks ago (Feb 26, I think) to the WG ML asking
for others to check my work before I bother Ben again.

the one sentence fix:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-37&url2=draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-38

the new examples:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-37&url2=draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-38

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