Re: [Danish] Charter Text and the Problem Statement

[Hannes Tschofenig <[e-mail]>]

Hi Michael,

You mention "EAP-TEAP-BRSKI", another technology where I do not precisely know how it is supposed to fit into the DANISH work (if at all).

I started with a simple task: I read through the charter text. I didn't understood the problem statement. Then, I looked through the mailing list and at the slides presented at the last meeting. I can find a lot of solution discussions but little discussion about the problem.

I believe I should understand the problem since I have been working in this domain for many years. It is most likely that the problem has been solved already many times before (since IoT is not really a new field anymore). Maybe the proposed solution gives a new spin to it. Maybe not.

If the problem cannot be described properly then there will be a lot of problems later in this group. The problem description will also help to understand who in the ecosystem needs to do something to turn this into a reality.

Ciao
Hannes

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>
Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 10:28 PM
To: Hannes Tschofenig <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Danish] Charter Text and the Problem Statement


Hannes Tschofenig <[e-mail]> wrote:
    > Regarding “best practice to ensure that a device is patched before
    > putting it into production, and updating roots of trust fits within the
    > scope of that sort of activity”: I don’t think there is any expectation
    > that the device will be updated before it is put in production
    > (i.e. powered on for the first time). You can assume that the device,
    > when it comes online for the first time and reaches out to the device
    > management server, gets a firmware update. Having that firmware update
    > happen before it is connected to the network is extremely unlikely.

One can onboard onto a quarantine network on which firmware updates can occur, and then move to the production network.

    > EAP-TLS is also not an IoT device onboarding protocol. From the charter
    > text I am also not assuming that you are attempting to define a new IoT
    > onboarding protocol or do you?

Yes, but several people are trying to do EAP-TEAP-BRSKI.

    > I am still trying to figure out how DANISH fits into the larger picture
    > and hence I am looking forward to read an architecture document. Is the
    > a pre-draft available already?

I don't think so, but maybe that would be a good direction to consider.

--
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.