Re: [Iot-onboarding] EXTERNAL: Re: [Anima] OPC and BRSKI

[Jack Visoky <[e-mail]>]

> I think so; there are some details of resale that BRSKI would like to make out-of-scope for the first document.  Some way, we have to deal with it, and I would actually like feedback from OPC about the parameters of different solutions here.

So in this case would the MASA need to be OPC specific, that is, use OPC Security and OPC methods?  Apologies if I'm getting ahead of myself on this conversation.

Thanks,

--Jack

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Richardson <[e-mail]> 
Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2019 9:08 PM
To: Randy Armstrong (OPC) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Jack Visoky <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Anima] [Iot-onboarding] OPC and BRSKI


Randy Armstrong (OPC) <[e-mail]> wrote:
    > The questions that the OPC WG needs to answer are:

    > 1) Can BRSKI meet our requirements?

I think so; there are some details of resale that BRSKI would like to make out-of-scope for the first document.  Some way, we have to deal with it, and I would actually like feedback from OPC about the parameters of different solutions here.

    > 2) If the answer to 1) is yes then can it work with OPC UA security?

yes, I think so.
is there any open source reference code for the OPC UA security?

    > 3) If the answer to 2) is no then do we use TLS or extend our own model
    > with something like BRSKI but not BRSKI?

    > While I cannot predict how the various participants in the OPC WGs will
    > respond to question 3), I do know it would make collaboration a lot
    > easier if the answer to 2) was yes.

I think yes.

--
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-