IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lamps] [Anima] /.well-known/brski reference to brski-registry

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 04 April 2022 14:02 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 473EE3A0A73; Mon, 4 Apr 2022 07:02:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
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 Y8tCWSkDipvs; Mon, 4 Apr 2022 07:02:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C63913A0A62; Mon, 4 Apr 2022 07:02:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9991238BD2; Mon, 4 Apr 2022 10:13:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id V5to57baeke1; Mon, 4 Apr 2022 10:13:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BBDA38BC5; Mon, 4 Apr 2022 10:13:14 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1649081594; bh=TcgMcOyXQAIUE20HZcqLh1OdAJF4oRrihwPmCaQKgj4=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=qWf2ft77yGDp8jfm1BP1V1QSdIBeMGNpJY4MnnaVpc95AWCgKnTrGoZ1nIhrsjIV0 y5FLPoRkmy2GCBKRqKnUDQU35hGT06nsTUsw6XmKyVzYDsz75Jf7g7gKf4X/EZeEd8 G9mhfr8gFZjQRiSdAGCWS4j3iulKHS2dvnrGJ7fYk01iA1ezPxxxJNvi+o5p6TgMEw hq5KgP+65oR6IozFMHP4pH0svx14Ixw1Q+gDph5oPI7rjyq1R4pGzIcyeFw8VEogsV LieTWpNDejZjXSQKpKSCKs42LYlMxf7UPsCnDjnNevy7/M+bXucV40Bg9b4lzijhuB b4hBb1shDWvJA==
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE8704BA; Mon, 4 Apr 2022 10:02:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>, "Brockhaus\, Hendrik" <hendrik.brockhaus@siemens.com>, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>, Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>, "david.von.oheimb\@siemens.com" <david.von.oheimb@siemens.com>, "spasm\@ietf.org" <spasm@ietf.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "anima\@ietf.org" <anima@ietf.org>, John Gray <John.Gray@entrust.com>, "Fries\, Steffen" <steffen.fries@siemens.com>
In-Reply-To: <E2286164-E5F8-4563-BC69-C34B6D18B687@sn3rd.com>
References: <30686.1648741661@localhost> <DB6PR1001MB12691C71E28CF3AEB4603368FEE19@DB6PR1001MB1269.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <4ACC1227-F79D-42B8-B050-07FB0C2BC86A@vigilsec.com> <DB6PR1001MB1269630A63DBF8DF02BCCB6DFEE09@DB6PR1001MB1269.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <E2286164-E5F8-4563-BC69-C34B6D18B687@sn3rd.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2022 10:02:09 -0400
Message-ID: <30241.1649080929@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/ufSFkmFvXXj_-nMa-b7_bP8w09M>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 04 Apr 2022 07:30:23 -0700
Subject: Re: [lamps] [Anima] /.well-known/brski reference to brski-registry
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is a venue for discussion of doing Some Pkix And SMime \(spasm\) work." <spasm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spasm/>
List-Post: <mailto:spasm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2022 14:02:23 -0000

Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com> wrote:
    > When the /.well-known/est/ was registered we only did the top level,
    > i.e., /est/. There are no registries for the /.well-known/est/*this
    > part*.  It’s not clear to me that you need to do anything more than get
    > /.well-known/cmp.

Yes, and then we updated it with RFC8995, but at the last minute, we moved
all the new stuff into /.well-known/brski and established a registry.

    > What will be the registration policy [0] for the ‘p’ values? I assume
    > FCFS (first come first served)?

I would think Specification Required if it's going to be part of a deployable
infrastructure.   (Not IETF Specification!)

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email