Re: [TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-ecdhe-psk-aead-00.txt

[<[e-mail]>]

Hi Sean,
That might be a good thing, yes. If so, it would be best to make that relationship explicit with an "Updates: " header note, referencing DICE in this document, and explaining how it is extending it. 
thanks,
Gabriel 

    On Monday, July 11, 2016 7:35 AM, Sean Turner <[e-mail]> wrote:
 
 

 
> On Jul 10, 2016, at 03:36, [e-mail] wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm curious as to the relationship between this TLS WG draft and the DICE profile for IoT (currently in Auth48):
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dice-profile
> 
> The dice profile uses two TLS ciphershuites
> 
> TLS_PSK_WITH_AES_128_CCM_8            (defined in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6655)
> 
> TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CCM_8    (defined in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7251)
> 
> Notice that the DICE profile defines nothing (it has no IANA considerations). Instead, it reuses definitions established previously per the references above.
> 
> This draft-ietf-tls-ecdhe-psk-aeak  claims to also define IoT-friendly ciphersuites, for example, TLS_ECDHE_PSK_WITH_AES_128_CCM_8_SHA256 
> 
> However, it does not reference the DICE profile draft. 
> 
> What is the difference between these?

There’s might be a relationship between the DICE profile and this draft in the future.

The DICE draft profiles the existing set of cipher suites that are already defined for IoT; the complete list can be found here:
https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-parameters/tls-parameters.xhtml#tls-parameters-4

draft-ietf-tls-ecdhe-psk-aead is adding more algorithms to that list.  The DICE profile can be updated later to include these newly defined cipher suites if that’s what the WG wants to do.

Make sense?

spt