Re: [Dtls-iot] Latest dice profile draft

Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 19 October 2015 22:31 UTC

Return-Path: <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 766BA1B2BA2 for <dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 15:31:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 ymaR6y3kl9kA for <dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 15:31:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x234.google.com (mail-vk0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 792301B2D68 for <dtls-iot@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 15:31:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vkat63 with SMTP id t63so113393331vka.1 for <dtls-iot@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 15:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=YHMpc6QkID4FxoxUsFpEppQgd7uwMWnC/1Q6DV8/2so=; b=cLGKqHDNlMoQJQO5ZbnNg4G2F2aoTmMFir0qCR4fRuNU5si6AbesIEDqUIXBbjRqTf 4uxsSiuB6jB94VoolaifhVTv0Jmlomx3k08TPusYqCZw9ei9Uf4KszXAHnfPhfEOiBxi xz7JThV3LtubrWFi188C2O+M5r9/yVEXWo8Z+flSAiZZj3fyxE+Ci3+tckk0BhUJkeeb NTyf5WeB8m0CjrRTDeYF4jPlhPa8wAJjXlHI0lEqA4R3ZkPkxLgkz95/zoidOwobnQhJ J7xEbbAFnFzY7iWSy21FDXtYuJ6arHzlA+Q7DtgJhPEs+sSEDlSb0Jtrzl6U0GLpv7Yl ZZXw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.31.8.77 with SMTP id 74mr19149753vki.67.1445293871634; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 15:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.31.54.8 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 15:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <D24A79AC.37ACC%thomas.fossati@alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <D24A79AC.37ACC%thomas.fossati@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:31:11 -0500
Message-ID: <CAKKJt-ekDv5zrBhAsZN2VF7p8vRXGGo6m+iV9sOkofdmEwZ6cA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
To: "FOSSATI, Thomas (Thomas)" <thomas.fossati@alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1145507ed0a36305227cb39e
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/7yAQ3yQC2HmNKaoQPiJLZxaXl50>
Cc: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, "dtls-iot@ietf.org" <dtls-iot@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Dtls-iot] Latest dice profile draft
X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list <dtls-iot.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dtls-iot>, <mailto:dtls-iot-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dtls-iot/>
List-Post: <mailto:dtls-iot@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtls-iot-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtls-iot>, <mailto:dtls-iot-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 22:31:18 -0000

Hi, Thomas,

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 4:53 AM, FOSSATI, Thomas (Thomas) <
thomas.fossati@alcatel-lucent.com>; wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>
> We think we've addressed all IESG comments:
>
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dice-profile/ballot/#ben-campbell
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dice-profile/ballot/#spencer-dawkins
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dice-profile/ballot/#barry-leiba
>
> (thank you Ben, Spencer and Barry),  and submitted a new version of the
> profile draft.
>
> Please, check the diff from –16 at
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dice-profile-17
>

I'm happy, but just to make sure you didn't break anything making me happy
...

I asked about providing a reference for "constant time" in this text:

   For use with this profile the PSK identities
   SHOULD NOT assume a structured format (such as domain names,
   Distinguished Names, or IP addresses) and a constant time bit-by-bit
   comparison operation MUST be used by the server for any operation
   related to the PSK identity.


The -17 corresponding text substituted "byte-by-byte" for "bit-by-bit",
which I don't have an opinion about, but "constant time" simply
disappeared.

Was that intentional?

Thanks,

Spencer


> This is the version that will be sent to the RFC editor.
>
> Cheers and thanks very much to *all* of you for the great work,
>
> Thomas & Hannes.
>