Re: [Lake] Call for adoption for draft-selander-lake-edhoc - respond by June 22

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

On 2020-06-22, at 07:54, Hannes Tschofenig <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> researchers on this list to get excited about introducing more solutions

Right, thank you for reminding me that I still have to reply.

I’m quite happy that EDHOC has caused CTLS to emerge.  That will certainly cause some fragmentation, but it is a step long overdue for TLS/DTLS.  I believe we need to continue working on creating the environment that will lead to CTLS actually getting completed.  I don’t mind if Hannes calls this environment “getting excited”; creating mindshare is often how technology progresses.

I don’t think that CTLS obviates the need for EDHOC, for reasons that should by now well-expressed inside and outside this mailing list.
So I am in favor of adopting draft-selander-lake-edhoc as a working group document of LAKE.

I’d make some meta-comments on design for choice, but those would just lead to more unneeded discussion.  Can choice damage the Internet or its applications?  It sure can.  Perspectives on this differ, and few people will manage to control the influence on this perspective from their desire for a specific outcome.  Competition has already managed to significantly improve both sides.  Enough said.

Grüße, Carsten