[core] FW: Review draft-tiloca-core-oscore-discovery-04

Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> Wed, 20 November 2019 07:03 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@augustcellars.com>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB22F12081B for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:03:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 uIqV_mdEyGyP for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:03:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail2.augustcellars.com (augustcellars.com [50.45.239.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64622120818 for <core@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:03:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Jude (73.180.8.170) by mail2.augustcellars.com (192.168.0.56) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:03:24 -0800
From: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: 'Core WG mailing list' <core@ietf.org>
References:
In-Reply-To:
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 15:03:23 +0800
Message-ID: <022101d59f70$9a9cf9b0$cfd6ed10$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AdWfXIQJlpA/YMA0SUW7Q+YpysTACwAFA5Ag
Content-Language: en-us
X-Originating-IP: [73.180.8.170]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/FoNCVZtIRzYhv4Imx6e87ZoFk0w>
Subject: [core] FW: Review draft-tiloca-core-oscore-discovery-04
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 07:03:32 -0000

Need to go here as well.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 3:03 PM
To: 'draft-tiloca-core-oscore-discovery@ietf.org'
<draft-tiloca-core-oscore-discovery@ietf.org>
Subject: Review draft-tiloca-core-oscore-discovery-04

* Should this document be re-written to only use CoRAL-reef?

* Introduction - You have the statement that generally one application group
uses one OSCORE group.  I don't know that I agree with this statement.  It
depends to a large extent of how you define an application group.  For
example, if you are looking at both administration and usage as being in the
same App group then this is not a true statement.

* Section 2 - If you want ACE-KEY-GROUPCOMM-OSCORE to be an information
reference, then the definition for 'name' needs to be changed.

* Section 2 - Just replace and use the correct terms for countersignature
algorithm info and countersignature key info structures.

* Section 3 - For 'app-gp' - the MAY is confusing to me.  Better to say MUST
occur once for each application group and MUST contain only a single
application group.  

* Section 5 - I don't care if you specify the same application group
multiple times.   I don't want to have to figure out how to check this one
thing and error.  Plus the end result will always be the same anyway

* Section 5.1 - I think the anchor in the response is supposed to be absent.

* Section 6 - It looks like you are registering [2001:db8:4::4] twice - that
looks like it will mess things up.

* Section 6 - I am not sure why you are registering the app-grp on the
individual device rather than on the group itself.  That means that If I go
in reverse, from the app group to the address of the app group, then I get
the individual endpoints rather than the group multicast address.  This
might be done for somebody who wants to get the messages in the group and
would be permitted to do so.