IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rats] Call for adoption (after draft rename) for Yang module draft

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 13 November 2019 11:04 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: rats@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rats@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E4EF120072 for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Nov 2019 03:04:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vsohj-xserSP for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Nov 2019 03:04:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE29F12003F for <rats@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Nov 2019 03:04:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.41.2] (unknown [58.212.133.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B28FD3897A; Wed, 13 Nov 2019 06:01:37 -0500 (EST)
To: Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com>
Cc: rats@ietf.org
References: <8B173958-FC2A-4D1D-A81C-F324AB632CD7@cisco.com> <147F9159-6055-4E55-ABDC-43DFE3498BF1@island-resort.com> <ce5f8206-74dc-36bb-0093-a93045d5c67f@sit.fraunhofer.de> <0A7E3A4F-8534-4E98-BCB7-1454E07699F4@island-resort.com> <C3AE2645-49C8-4313-BCED-02FEB576B614@cisco.com> <1C8A1884-A37D-45E3-8C11-2FC5A083B245@island-resort.com> <ba12a686-1b34-21a3-388c-bbe01c01a408@sandelman.ca> <4A83CDF5-D29F-4279-8B03-E9D23299EB53@island-resort.com> <0C6940B0-E93F-4274-9D00-DEC4119B8F69@island-resort.com> <85c7c287-48e3-83e7-900e-8e50ce43eba3@sandelman.ca> <147FEACA-56F0-43A0-8F25-639D0613E4BD@island-resort.com>
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Message-ID: <22fd43c8-7d6e-2dd8-c29a-aa86ee894ff6@sandelman.ca>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 19:04:40 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <147FEACA-56F0-43A0-8F25-639D0613E4BD@island-resort.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/sgs2TA4AG4JUAC3H2DEQt7gS07w>
Subject: Re: [Rats] Call for adoption (after draft rename) for Yang module draft
X-BeenThere: rats@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Remote Attestation Procedures <rats.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rats>, <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rats/>
List-Post: <mailto:rats@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats>, <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 11:04:49 -0000


On 2019-11-13 1:56 a.m., Laurence Lundblade wrote:
>
> Got that one totally wrong. I even knew everything you describe about YANG.
>
> I still think it is better if we just stick to EAT / CWT / JWT claims described with CDDL as the way we define claims in RATS, except for a few TPM-specific claims. 

Nothing I've said is opposed to that.
I rather agree.  I don't think that EAT is complex enough to require a
definition in YANG.

But, that also has nothing to do with whether we'd need a YANG signing
standard if we defined them in YANG.
We wouldn't, because we'd be signing JSON, CBOR (or XML if someone
insisted) using JSOE and COSE.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email