IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Secdispatch] [core] EDHOC Summary

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Tue, 02 April 2019 09:19 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
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 EC2A21200A2; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 02:19:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 phKEADAtLYmA; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 02:19:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:1829::130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 869E412009A; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 02:19:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F072E660260; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 12:18:59 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pFxdeGPmZdHt; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 12:18:57 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:1829::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF15666012B; Tue, 2 Apr 2019 12:18:57 +0300 (EEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <438BFA1F-5EA3-4B8E-A04F-EF643A8725E3@tzi.org>
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2019 12:18:58 +0300
Cc: "secdispatch@ietf.org" <secdispatch@ietf.org>, core <core@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <721CFE5F-9E3D-4FBA-8A27-D8D975903B38@piuha.net>
References: <359EC4B99E040048A7131E0F4E113AFC01B3311A9F@marchand> <438BFA1F-5EA3-4B8E-A04F-EF643A8725E3@tzi.org>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdispatch/wblEdg7gySdhQtzp6ogzt6LB55U>
Subject: Re: [Secdispatch] [core] 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, 02 Apr 2019 09:19:04 -0000

FWIW, I had not had time to look at this during the IETF week, nor did I have an opportunity to be at the CORE WG during the IETF. But I support Roman's conclusion below:

>> -----[ Conclusion
>> 
>> There appears to be an understood and scoped problem that is feasible to engineer.  Among the available starting points to address the problem defined in question #1, EDHOC presents a viable choice.  
>> 
>> Chartering a narrowly scoped, short-lived WG in this space with EDHOC as a starting point seems to be an attractive path forward, but we would like to receive community feedback on the degree of support for this approach.

Jari

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email