Re: [Dtls-iot] Secure Time (again)

Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com> Wed, 12 August 2015 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <msj@nthpermutation.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 14B521A1A32 for <dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 08:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 Yr7P4_zQ2H0v for <dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 08:55:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-f176.google.com (mail-qk0-f176.google.com [209.85.220.176]) (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 ABBEB1A8788 for <dtls-iot@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 08:55:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qkbm65 with SMTP id m65so6558400qkb.2 for <dtls-iot@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 08:55:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=32dWI59SKKnif/Wcopv68TRVRmJn52xabmLQ5WI7qqk=; b=CFy+kIHjQyEqosmXNVytn+QJQqKOnAzVtky1PzjEcD3L/Ss+Ualy7wQlNt6hX4niL9 fqnbgPKmFN28W79A8uTAaRzaE6cWInWxwuQeOrRMGEi9sI1PYGAq1hFDI6lfpedvSBYE 8z3/A+HAxi5JuA3r643a/Xj4RSJHuwcDOeRB9yj2ZEtmQJCNcySJihGj38KtWzkl2yG2 SMq+31S2FeYMXclXo1GbsQVgo2lJV8J2FBe40VZ9wcY7tD4qS8RFO7hEa6jtqSdaILtT tajKwBkPrq43gy7BsBCm1yOwixi736moP2GU8tl4dKeYCLBa2jwHDHq9ImIuoHUMwUao uAtA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmjaLDoLLyEA9BcSliXOdwftBeB381a5ZL+PkkMerwTCLnm6LBVfyNIypLZGlocgNY88BVB
X-Received: by 10.55.23.99 with SMTP id i96mr60765535qkh.33.1439394900927; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 08:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:148:c000:1bb4:5878:8b5b:6b96:a48a? ([2601:148:c000:1bb4:5878:8b5b:6b96:a48a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 42sm3378724qkz.38.2015.08.12.08.54.59 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 12 Aug 2015 08:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
To: Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>
References: <55C4D1CE.6010802@gmx.net> <55C79A90.5070900@nthpermutation.com> <55C9CFB4.5070702@gmx.net> <CABcZeBPfV9fmu_67sT0ewf+dRy5Ww4_nZUeQyhBQ9+RsHb_g2g@mail.gmail.com> <55CA0692.9000509@gmx.net> <55CA0837.5050008@nthpermutation.com> <55CA0A5C.1020304@sics.se> <55CA0AAB.8070808@gmx.net> <55CA0D93.5020209@nthpermutation.com> <55CA153C.2080001@cs.tcd.ie> <55CA3F65.20002@nthpermutation.com> <sjmvbckr0xz.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org>
From: Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com>
Message-ID: <55CB6C5B.7090107@nthpermutation.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 11:55:07 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <sjmvbckr0xz.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/XOAJ6vp1SrsBa8bLl2tyDeVy-hY>
Cc: dtls-iot@ietf.org, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Subject: Re: [Dtls-iot] Secure Time (again)
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: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 15:55:03 -0000

On 8/12/2015 11:17 AM, Derek Atkins wrote:
>> They really aren't trying to solve a problem in a manner that would
>> >have applicability to IOT.
> I actually attended a tictoc meeting a couple IETFs ago and presented
> the IoT time sync problem to them.  They were unaware of the issue and
> considered it an interesting problem to try to solve.
>
> We should continue to engage them!
>

Charter creep is usually a bad thing.    I'm not saying not to do it, 
but it might actually be better to go to NTP (which Karen also chairs) 
and which is probably a better stepping off point than the IEEE PTP that 
Tictoc is working on.  It's probably that NTPv4 could incorporate IoT 
functionality better than Tictoc.

And for nothing else than a cool acronym, standing up an IOT integration 
working group  (e.g. to have a place to talk about all the pieces and 
how they can come together) might be even a better choice -> Interim 
Designs for the Internet of Things -> idiot.

Later, Mike