[apps-discuss] WG summary: CoRE

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Thu, 08 August 2013 20:03 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56A6711E821C for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 13:03:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TMTfnQ-W8U4h for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 13:03:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6310F11E8205 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 13:03:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de
Received: from smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.224.120]) by informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r78K3XWS020138 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 22:03:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.217.105] (p5489221B.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.137.34.27]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B40FF157; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 22:03:32 +0200 (CEST)
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 22:03:31 +0200
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Message-Id: <D9EE83B2-D32C-4762-A9C4-D7DD2C7483CE@tzi.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
Subject: [apps-discuss] WG summary: CoRE
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 20:03:40 -0000

Summary of CoRE sessions @ IETF87
See agenda at
    http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/agenda/agenda-87-core
and consolidated slides at
    http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/87/slides/slides-87-core-0.pdf

WG status: After recently completing the base specification for CoAP
(draft-ietf-core-coap-18 now in RFC editor queue waiting for two
security MISSREFs), the WG is in a transition phase.  Several
complementary documents are nearing completion, with some of them
receiving little recent review and implementation, compounded by the
current vacation time.  There is considerable interest in adding new
work, though.

Monday: Substantive discussion on the new subject of authorization,
with multiple drafts; there seems to be energy to review them even
though few had read the drafts in advance.  (A self-organized ad-hoc
group of 9 people had a lunch meeting between the two CoRE slots and
created an action plan for work until IETF88; work on this is active.)
On the recently added WG documents, a very quiet room and largely
presentation-style; somewhat inevitable given that there was much more
interest in the new work being brought in to the group.

Thursday: MUCH more discussion, every item had worthwhile comments.
Advanced congestion control is developing slowly, only one group doing
substantive work presented preliminary results, so that will take some
time.  Of the older active work items, the block transfer draft had
good guidance on its remaining issues.  Links-json has little
independent implementation experience at this time, and so will wait
for that.  The alternative transports subject had much discussion, and
the group will seek guidance on the URL/URI issues surrounding
transport selection.  Finally, conditional observation had some good
guidance, that draft is still fairly incomplete but has a path for
further development.

Grüße, Carsten