Re: [Roll] draft-ietf-roll-security-framework returned to working group.

Hi again Abdussalam,

> The last comments on this return

That's good to hear :-)

I think you should be happy with the outcome.
This I-D will be re-born with a large amount of the text in place. Because this
will be a significant change in the content of the document, it will need
renewed working group consensus and so return to the WG is necessary. However, I
expect this I-D to go forward quite soon.

The other security work, which you appear to support, is currently planned and
being hatched in the RPL working group.

So everything is good, the flowers are blooming, and the bunnies are hopping
around happily.

Cheers,
Adrian

> ========================
> IESG Discuss> 20-01-2011> I think this is a really good document, and
> support its publication. I am specifically concerned about punting the
> details on public key
> distribution, then finding they are not covered here either. Did I get
> the wrong document?  Where are those issues going to be addressed?
> 
> I agree that it provide good information as long we don't relate it to
> another document or another purpose, and happy that you support
> publication. I agree that it has not covered that security technique
> purpose, but I think this draft can be base for future
> specification/standard that will cover the issue refered to. I
> recommend thoes issues are going to be addressed in a RPL-Security
> standard I-D. Please not that there is no harm in passing this draft,
> but it will encourage progress/efforts. If there was a harm in passing
> the draft please reply.
> 
> IESG Discuss>05-05-2011> I believe that the core of AD's discuss is
> that there is no specification for how the authenticated mode of
> roll-rpl is to
> be done, and specifically using public key based mechanisms
> for key distribution.
> 
> If there was a harm in passing the draft please inform. This draft is
> an *informational* not a standard track that may be why it does not
> specify RPL authentication. This draft is a good introduction to a
> future standard I-D.
> 
> IESG Discuss> 05-05-2011> I'd be happy to clear were there to be a
> good specification of how to do e.g. a signature based authenticated
> mode, or
> a public key based way to distribute keys for an
> authenticated mode, or even a kerberos-like way to
> distribute secret keys for an authenticated mode. While this
> will all be optional to implement, its absence is really
> not consistent with bcp107.
> 
> I recommend a work either to be doing above request in an I-D
> (standard) within Security Area (not in Routing Area) or in an I-D
> (standard) that relates totally to RPL as RPL-Sec (standard) in this
> WG.
> 
> Best Regards
> AB
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll