Re: [Secdispatch] EDHOC Summary

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Tue, 09 April 2019 08:43 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBB091201DA for <secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 01:43:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 bPo6gu6Nt4in for <secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 01:43:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67568120794 for <secdispatch@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 01:43:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from client-0253.vpn.uni-bremen.de (client-0253.vpn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.107.253]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 44dgmG1RSJzyYS; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 10:43:10 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <1554794627589.50834@sony.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 10:43:09 +0200
Cc: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>, "secdispatch@ietf.org" <secdispatch@ietf.org>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 576492187.548713-35335da4202fc20938fc49a8b954e8b0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2D4625E8-84C4-423C-8630-1C5FF6164B9F@tzi.org>
References: <d741d224c8324c3f8a300c467a836913@seldmbx10.corpusers.net> <CAL02cgSabY44iWzMzSo3SYtkC_nYc4h4sL5wA==VJQkgPar75A@mail.gmail.com> <1554794627589.50834@sony.com>
To: "Blomqvist, Peter" <Peter.Blomqvist@sony.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdispatch/oXgki50_RNS7LNwEgYqjJOkBxF8>
Subject: Re: [Secdispatch] EDHOC Summary
X-BeenThere: secdispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Dispatch <secdispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdispatch>, <mailto:secdispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/secdispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:secdispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdispatch>, <mailto:secdispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2019 08:43:21 -0000

On Apr 9, 2019, at 09:23, Blomqvist, Peter <Peter.Blomqvist@sony.com> wrote:
> 
> 200 bytes per day

Or 18.5 mbit/s (yes, millibits).

Millibit networks is one of the scenarios where ALARA(*) as a design objective does make sense — there is no hard design limit, but actual security will need to compete with less security, and ALARA helps actual security stay competitive.

Grüße, Carsten

(*) ALARA: “As low as reasonably achievable", a term stolen from nuclear engineering.