Re: [Dtls-iot] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-dice-profile-14

Stephen Farrell <> Mon, 14 September 2015 13:27 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1762C1B3D85; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 06:27:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.311
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vq4AXpEVhzij; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 06:27:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3CD11B2FA6; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 06:27:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA22DBE4D; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 14:27:51 +0100 (IST)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wZL2hwEx35Dp; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 14:27:51 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [] ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9495DBDCC; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 14:27:51 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=mail; t=1442237271; bh=hQAaKZGLRBjDhknpGVo5Xxuveg2co9tIi/IpydUBBs8=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=LqCjQFqzJhmc3JE/DYrLK3K4Q5T+snJALoVFhSG/C2xohp6PXdryj+Iy1CmZrfNIk iR4sJuqb6/ArDY88uAusgpSSTGpJnPCv4SPzLZbg8SG9JjCD47ar2FqTikuPeGehbF mQNDvGkTa2RRmPdB97oaF4MS78PGaye7GN7DIanM=
To: Hannes Tschofenig <>, Brian E Carpenter <>,, General Area Review Team <>
References: <> <>
From: Stephen Farrell <>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 14:27:51 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Kga7UeebPD2mtUg0Xron1aJmnNMovVfwD"
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [Dtls-iot] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-dice-profile-14
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 13:27:59 -0000

Hi Brian, Hannes,

On 08/09/15 20:24, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
>> > The downref to RFC7251 was not mentioned in the last call and that RFC isn't
>> > in the downref registry. ((Yes, I've been in the IESG and I know how
>> > annoying this can be, but it's a process glitch.))
>> > 
> Thanks for pointing this out.

Yep, mea culpa for not spotting that. However, RFC 7252 (CoAP, a PS)
also has a normative reference to 7251, on which basis I think we can
safely claim that this is no longer a downref. Actually, it looks
like the downref also wasn't called out in the CoAP IETF LC, but I
guess the sky didn't fall, so that's ok:-) And recall that the
definition of an ok downref is one that's "accepted by the community"
(says [1]) and I think CoAP is as is AES-CCM.

I plan to add 7251 to the downref registry [2] shortly, and to put the
DICE profile on the Oct 1 IESG telechat. If however, that's too much
of a process sin, there's still time to do another IETF LC on the
DICE profile without affecting the timing. So while I figure we're ok
without that, I'll do the 2nd IETF LC if anyone yells now.