[Lake] Re: [EXT] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-lake-edhoc-impl-cons-06 (Ends 2026-05-18)

["Sipos, Brian J." <[e-mail]>]

Authors and WG,
I think this draft provides helpful additions to the base EDHOC specification outside of the protocol elements themselves.

One topic that I found myself puzzling over with EDHOC is the concept of a "lifetime" or "lifecycle" of the entire EDHOC session within a larger application context.
For example, is there an expectation that once a "successfully completed EDHOC session" is established and any application keys are successfully exported that the EDHOC entities should retain or discard their respective session states? The existing concept of a session key update presumes that the session state is retained to allow the update to happen. There is certainly discussion in base EDHOC and in this draft about how to handle state keeping for failed or invalid sessions, but is there any general implementation guidance possible about how long to expect to keep successful session states? Could such guidance be added to this draft?

The reason why this would come up in an implementation is that it would drive whether an EHDOC library provides an API to persist or locally serialize the session state (in an application-defined location) or whether the library expects session state to be kept in-library and not able to be persisted in some long-term way.

Thanks for any advice,
Brian S.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mališa Vučinić via Datatracker <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, May 4, 2026 5:02 AM
> To: [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]
> Subject: [EXT] [Lake] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-lake-edhoc-impl-cons-06 (Ends
> 2026-05-18)
> 
> APL external email warning: Verify sender [e-mail]
> before clicking links or attachments
> 
> As discussed during the IETF 125 meeting in Shenzhen, this message starts a
> WG Last Call for:
> draft-ietf-lake-edhoc-impl-cons-06
> 
> This Working Group Last Call ends on 2026-05-18
> 
> Abstract:
>    This document provides considerations for guiding the implementation
>    of the authenticated key exchange protocol Ephemeral Diffie-Hellman
>    Over COSE (EDHOC).
> 
> File can be retrieved from:
> 
> Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the
> publication of this document by replying to this email keeping [e-mail]
> in copy. Objections should be explained and suggestions to resolve them are
> highly appreciated.
> 
> Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual
> Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [1].
> Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions
> of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any.
> Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be found
> at [3].
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/
> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/
> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lake-edhoc-impl-cons/
> 
> There is also an HTML version available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lake-edhoc-impl-cons-06.html
> 
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-lake-edhoc-impl-cons-06
> 
> --
> Lake mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]