IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Anima] constrained-join-proxy registration of BRSKI_JP

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 02 November 2022 07:06 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 EA6E5C1522D1 for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 00:06:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.907
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qOqnBO8W-hFh for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 00:06:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [IPv6:2a01:7e00:e000:2bb::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B499C14F749 for <anima@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 00:06:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dyas.sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2a02:3032:40b:c231:bb05:36ba:d3b5:c722]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E0CD1F45D; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 07:05:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dyas.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 94FF3A0C45; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:05:58 +0100 (CET)
Received: from dyas (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dyas.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92D8FA0C3A; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:05:58 +0100 (CET)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, "anima@ietf.org" <anima@ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <ce1f273d-dfb5-ee9b-2ded-02c77360ab4b@gmail.com>
References: <Yxd/oBl0dmbmUI8L@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <DU0P190MB1978F420D478B93CE29F36D3FD4C9@DU0P190MB1978.EURP190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <1069641.1666559668@dyas> <1135706.1666576680@dyas> <DU0P190MB1978CB28B49E74237A238646FD309@DU0P190MB1978.EURP190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <12548.1666795972@dyas> <DU0P190MB197834901144617C0B1D3DC1FD309@DU0P190MB1978.EURP190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <5E758F92-9C1B-43BC-9FC0-063059A0A65E@tzi.org> <26048.1666805942@dyas> <DU0P190MB1978FDEB1B5FC820C5F73A71FD379@DU0P190MB1978.EURP190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <ce1f273d-dfb5-ee9b-2ded-02c77360ab4b@gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> message dated "Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:58:16 +1300."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:05:58 +0100
Message-ID: <656404.1667372758@dyas>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/UaYngK5n5mDKCWArRUgp36Z05JQ>
Subject: [Anima] constrained-join-proxy registration of BRSKI_JP
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 02 Nov 2022 07:06:07 -0000

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
    > 2) At the moment draft-ietf-anima-constrained-join-proxy cuts a corner
    > in its definition of BRSKI_JP. Even if you want to save typing by
    > citing Fig. 10 of RFC8995, you need to
    > add an IANA Consideration formally registering the objective (like section 8.7 of
    > RFC8995).

Hi... I can easily think that something got lost as we moved where we were
registering things around.  I think you speaking about section 5.1.2:

["AN_join_registrar", 4, 255, "BRSKI_JP"],
    [O_IPv6_LOCATOR,
     h'fda379a6f6ee00000200000064000001', IPPROTO_UDP, 5684],

This was actually defined "first" at:
  https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-anima-constrained-voucher-18.html#name-grasp-discovery-2

So, I think that the complaint should be about constrained-voucher now.
I agree that there is no IANA Considerations in this document about BRSKI_JP.
I'm not sure what exactly to do.

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8995.html#name-grasp-objective-names
registered the AN_join_registrar, and we did not, AFAIK, specify how
objective values would be registered.
I guess that constrained-voucher needs to ask IANA to add a pointer to
constrained-voucher!  (And constrained-join-proxy in next email)

https://github.com/anima-wg/constrained-voucher/pull/238/files

## GRASP Discovery Registry

IANA is asked to extend the registration of the "AN\_Proxy" (without quotes) in the "GRASP Objective Names" table in the Grasp Parameter registry.
This document should also be cited for the new protocol value UDP defined in {{grasppledgediscovery}}.

IANA is asked to extend the registration of the "AN\_join\_registrar" (without quotes) in the "GRASP Objective Names" table in the Grasp Parameter registry.
This document should also be cited for the objective values "BRSKI_JP" defined in {{graspregistrardiscovery}}.


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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email