[Iot-onboarding] Some thoughts about iot-onboarding

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Wed, 27 March 2019 13:35 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
X-Original-To: iot-onboarding@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iot-onboarding@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18F00120005 for <iot-onboarding@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 06:35:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-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 nKegGtolJrDm for <iot-onboarding@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 06:35:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DF4D120273 for <iot-onboarding@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 06:35:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:52]) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A03A3548544 for <iot-onboarding@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 14:35:18 +0100 (CET)
Received: by faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id 855E9440036; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 14:35:18 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 14:35:18 +0100
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: iot-onboarding@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20190327133518.u2g455hqakhknuyj@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iot-onboarding/V2x1u8Z76SV9kDUUClPaVZ5xE4g>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 00:44:01 -0700
Subject: [Iot-onboarding] Some thoughts about iot-onboarding
X-BeenThere: iot-onboarding@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IoT onboarding mechanisms <iot-onboarding.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iot-onboarding>, <mailto:iot-onboarding-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/iot-onboarding/>
List-Post: <mailto:iot-onboarding@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iot-onboarding-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iot-onboarding>, <mailto:iot-onboarding-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 13:35:26 -0000

I like idea of survey of onboarding method as an RFC. Individual or
even as WG document. Its an informative first milestone good to work
out.

One simple way to scope the amount of work for the survey output is 
to determine what specific apects we want to describe. The table from
eliot is very comprehensive and would be a lot of work to complete
in a document format.

The aspects i think we want to describe are i think what we would like
to use as input to 2nd milestones. For example the drafts brought
forward in ANIMA could be 2nd round milestones, they need to achieve
certain goals, and we do for example want to know that all their
proposed work is well spent, e.g.: there are no pre-existing onboarding
protocols that cold be used to do what they want to do. Aka: milestone 1
survey could justification reference for the milestone 2 docs.

Just one thought of how to approach. I am also happy to step back from
the survey side as an actual milestone deliverable, but concentrate
on progressing the likely most simple WiFi onboarding we think we need,
and keep work on survey as lightweight as possible (github only).