IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Tm-rid] 1st steps - time lines and drafts

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 01 August 2019 20:57 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: tm-rid@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tm-rid@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CEDB120279 for <tm-rid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 13:57:05 -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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 OGP2ucKnhbsa for <tm-rid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 13:57:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B1CB120273 for <tm-rid@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 13:57:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2:56b2:3ff:fe0b:d84]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6D1F380BE for <tm-rid@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 16:56:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CF968EF for <tm-rid@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 16:57:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: tm-rid@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <bf4deda6-2872-2e1d-32a0-8248e66c5b7a@labs.htt-consult.com>
References: <30eb80bc-8f7a-e550-d081-547b8bf0dbed@labs.htt-consult.com> <41dbac5b-0c59-e470-f1c3-933a9dbc14d0@labs.htt-consult.com> <CAKM0pYNsj95RCnQAW7hggOfAQXRHCxXbC8JEUK_VNG3E8b1wXQ@mail.gmail.com> <bf4deda6-2872-2e1d-32a0-8248e66c5b7a@labs.htt-consult.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
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-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2019 16:57:01 -0400
Message-ID: <8916.1564693021@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tm-rid/FCpPYeJK06v_tVdi4BMeKA2Qq6g>
Subject: Re: [Tm-rid] 1st steps - time lines and drafts
X-BeenThere: tm-rid@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Trustworthy Multipurpose RemoteID <tm-rid.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tm-rid>, <mailto:tm-rid-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tm-rid/>
List-Post: <mailto:tm-rid@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tm-rid-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tm-rid>, <mailto:tm-rid-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2019 20:57:11 -0000

Robert Moskowitz <rgm@labs.htt-consult.com> wrote:
    > COID is significantly better than X.509 for constrained environments. 
    > Not as good as 'raw' structures introduced by HIP and used elsewhere
    > since, but if you need the full capability of a digital certificate in
    > a 'new', constrained, environment, then it demands careful
    > consideration.  Of course there are no PKI products that support it. 
    > This too is a consideration.

So, no installed based to fight with :-)

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email