Re: [Rats] About current RATS drafts

Hello Yuhei,

welcome :)

I think your survey is a quite astute representation of the current state.

Please note, that the "information-model" I-D was intended to kickstart 
the discussion about "where do the definitions of information elements 
go", it might not survive the outcome, or might become the hub document 
for the information model and how it is supposed to be extended, or 
absorbed by another doc - that is not clear yet.

Also, while EAT is currently placed in the "attestation evidence flow" 
(Claim) scope and not in the "attestation provision flow" (Assertion) 
scope, EAT is extendable and it might make sense to create EAT flavors 
for the other scope later, if required.

Current planning also includes to remove architectural text from the EAT 
I-D, but that requires some resolve (aka WG consensus) on how to proceed 
with the architecture I-D.

Having said that, everything I did not comment on seems to be right 
where it should be. Other comments?

Viele Grüße,

Henk

On 01.11.19 13:08, H Y wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm Yuhei Hayashi, network security researcher of NTT in Japan. I
> learned about the existence of RATS WG at IETF 105.
> 
> I'm interested in the work of RATS WG and I'm trying to understand it.
> So, I'm firstly trying to understand which drafts contain the
> standards listed in the charter.
> 
> I will attach the result of organizing it from my own point of view.
> I'm glad if you confirm that my understanding is correct, if possible.
> 
> Thanks,
> Yuhei
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RATS mailing list
> RATS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats
> 