Re: [core] Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-core-coap-tcp-tls-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Brian Raymor <[e-mail]>]

On 5/23/17 6:22 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
>>      I can give you the motivation why we are interested in CoAP over TLS /TCP. We have an existing implementation of LWM2M,
>>      which uses CoAP. We spent a lot of time getting that implementation rock-solid. Some enterprise deployments, which happen
>>      to have interesting firewall policies, do not allow us to use UDP. Hence, we were interested to add a TCP-based transport to CoAP.
>>      Making this enhancement turns out to be reasonably simple.

> I'll note that the rationale for using WebSockets for this purpose appears to be significantly less clear, and the combination of TCP and 
> WebSockets into a single document even more so.

I agree with what Hannes wrote in his earlier response to you - https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/core/current/msg08729.html - 

    The authors of the document have different views about the inclusion of the support of WebSockets in the document.
    I leave it to the responsible AD to decide what the best document structure is and what is indeed covered as part of the
    CORE working group charter.

I would encourage the authors of draft-savolainen-core-coap-websockets (based on their specific domain expertise) to weigh in on some of the WebSockets questions/concerns raised arising during these reviews. 

...Brian