Re: [Rats] CoTS and CoRIM

[Henk Birkholz <[e-mail]>]

Hi Hannes,

I obviously agree that the two documents are related. I also think that 
TAs can be endorsed (and not reference values, of course. Which text 
gave that impression? Could you please file an issue or even better a 
PR?) and that a CoRIM profile is a suitable solution.

I am not so sure that CoTS and CoRIM should merge. Having said that, 
while being pretty neutral on the matter, I would like to highlight that 
  the CoRIM I-D is a pretty technical, detail rich, and solution 
oriented document already. In other words, information density is high 
while the topic is definitively non-trivial.

All I am saying is that adding more topics to an already complex 
document is not always useful. Maybe the demarcation line between CoTS 
and CoRIM is more useful as is?


Viele Grüße,

Henk

On 14.12.23 14:02, hannes.tschofenig=[e-mail] wrote:
> Thanks for the quick response, Yogesh.
> 
> Two points:
> 
>   * The reason why I believe that the trust anchor functionality should
>     be part of CoRIM is that it is a core feature rather than an
>     extension. I understand that there is some history about how these
>     documents came into existence but this should not prevent us from
>     doing the “right” thing.
> 
>   * Using trust anchors under the umbrella of endorsements makes sense
>     to me. This needs to be more clearly articulated in the documents
>     though.
> 
> A word about the process: Decisions about the directions the document 
> take should be made on the mailing list rather than in private meetings. 
> The chairs should be more strict about this.
> 
> Ciao
> 
> Hannes
> 
> *From:*RATS <[e-mail]> *On Behalf Of *Yogesh Deshpande
> *Sent:* Donnerstag, 14. Dezember 2023 12:31
> *To:* muhammad_usama.sardar <[e-mail]>; 
> [e-mail]
> *Subject:* Re: [Rats] CoTS and CoRIM
> 
> Hi Hannes,
> 
> To your question:
> 
> /I am wondering why the two documents <draft-ietf-rats-corim> and 
> <draft-ietf-rats-concise-ta-stores> aren’t merged./
> 
> //
> 
> The work on Cots started at different point in time (by different 
> authors) and hence the CoRIM base document does refer Cots but is not 
> fully integrated.
> 
> We will discuss the possibility and implications of such in our regular 
> CoRIM meetings.
> 
> Regarding Trust Anchors as per RATS document (RFC 9334) to the best of 
> my knowledge it comes under the heading of Endorsements.
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9334#name-endorsements 
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9334#name-endorsements>
> 
> RATS treats Trust Anchors as a type of Endorsements.
> 
> Hope this information is helpful.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Yogesh
> 
> *From:*RATS <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> *On 
> Behalf Of *Muhammad Usama Sardar
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 14, 2023 8:21 AM
> *To:* [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> *Subject:* Re: [Rats] CoTS and CoRIM
> 
> Hi Hannes,
> 
> On 13.12.23 21:24, hannes.tschofenig=[e-mail] 
> <mailto:hannes.tschofenig=[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>     I am wondering why the two documents <draft-ietf-rats-corim> and
>     <draft-ietf-rats-concise-ta-stores> aren’t merged. Reading through
>     the RATS drafts I often get the impression that trust anchors have
>     somehow been forgotten and were added later, as an afterthought. The
>     RATS architecture RFC does not list trust anchors as an item in
>     Figure 1. In some other document trust anchors are then portrait as
>     belonging to reference values – somehow. That does not feel right to
>     me either.
> 
> I think it is completely wrong to consider trust anchors as Reference 
> Values. Can you name the document which presents this view?
> 
>     Ciao
> 
>     Hannes
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Usama
> 
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are 
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended 
> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the 
> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy 
> the information in any medium. Thank you.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RATS mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats