Re: [Anima] last minute changes to BRSKI to do endpoint discovery

"Fries, Steffen" <steffen.fries@siemens.com> Mon, 27 July 2020 05:41 UTC

From: "Fries, Steffen" <steffen.fries@siemens.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, "Brockhaus, Hendrik" <hendrik.brockhaus@siemens.com>, "anima@ietf.org" <anima@ietf.org>, max pritikin <pritikin@cisco.com>, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: AW: last minute changes to BRSKI to do endpoint discovery
Thread-Index: AQHWX7nZAFTFfGkZ50WeAMpw9tqZsKkTGwkAgALeAICABPcmQA==
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 05:41:33 +0000
Message-ID: <4b900e875bea48e685d430dac3af74c8@siemens.com>
References: <4a3b24b3737f4dcbbf3154c89d9c8200@siemens.com> <17250.1594397451@localhost> <a26f70c7dc5145b581f71ece3106529b@siemens.com> <26733.1595375481@localhost> <AM0PR10MB3153F5AA4119DBDDB97F6D06FE790@AM0PR10MB3153.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <6971.1595562387@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <6971.1595562387@localhost>
Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/rtyvH8y_msGI7j-T9gE7SUFDupM>
Subject: Re: [Anima] last minute changes to BRSKI to do endpoint discovery
Precedence: list

Hi Michael,

> From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
>     > I would appreciate to use /.well-known/brski for the endpoints
>     > specified in BRSKI and use /.well-known/est for those specified in
>     > RFC7030.
>     > This offers more flexibility for future extensions like BSKI-AE.
> 
> Such a change would be large to BRSKI.
> 
> Brian suggests making this an update.
> But, I think it would cause market confusion if we published an RFC with
> /.well-known/est/requestvoucher, and then said, "no sorry, no we meant
> /.well-known/brski/requestvoucher"
> 
> Would there be pledge implementations that would try one and then the
> other?
> I will say that I'm *NOT* keen on including the Resource Link GET, but I can
> tolerate it.
The intention was not to include the discovery mechanism right away into BRSKI. It was rather the question to rename the BRSKI defined endpoints to /.well-known/brski to underline, that the voucher exchange is independent from the chosen enrollment protocol. The discovery should be done in BRSKI-AE, which should update the base specification then. I understand, that we should not state /.well-known/est and the immediately update it afterwards to /.well-known/brski . That would look awkward. If we just rename the endpoints in BRSKI, would that cause such a large change? 

Best regards
Steffen


> 
> 
> I think that we'd need to:
>   1) blessing of our AD.
>   2) pull document out of RFC-editor queue.
>   3) revise it, do a WGLC on revision.
>   4) get AD to put it back in queue.
> 
> The ROLL WG did this for a document last year when we realized that a new
> document obsoleted some of the recommendations.  It took longer than
> planned, but that was partly because the other document had to settle a bit.
> I think we could do this in the time for the 2nd WGLC and about four days.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
> 
>

[Anima] last minute changes to BRSKI to do endpoi… Michael Richardson
Re: [Anima] last minute changes to BRSKI to do en… Brian E Carpenter
Re: [Anima] last minute changes to BRSKI to do en… Brockhaus, Hendrik
Re: [Anima] last minute changes to BRSKI to do en… Michael Richardson
Re: [Anima] last minute changes to BRSKI to do en… Michael Richardson
Re: [Anima] last minute changes to BRSKI to do en… Brian E Carpenter
Re: [Anima] last minute changes to BRSKI to do en… Fries, Steffen
Re: [Anima] last minute changes to BRSKI to do en… Brian E Carpenter