Hi Peter,

I’m missing context on how would that happen. The pledge selects *one* JP based 
on the Join Metric in the received EBs. It fills the destination IPv6 address 
in the packet with JP’s link-local address and sends it. How would multiple 
proxies forward the message in that case?

Mališa


> On 19 Jun 2017, at 14:52, peter van der Stok <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Malisa,
> 
> I have a question about the join protocol described in sections 5-6.
> The pledge sends a EDHOC message_1 to JRC via a stateless proxy.
> It is not clear to me what happens when more than 1 proxy forwards the 
> message to the JRC.
> 
> Peter
> 
> Mališa Vučinić schreef op 2017-06-15 11:05:
>> All,
>> We have just submitted a new version of the minimal-security draft in
>> preparation for the plugtest that will be held in Prague. This version
>> (-03) will be referenced by the official test description of the
>> plugtest.
>> The most notable changes are:
>> - pledge-initiated EDHOC handshake with optional separate response
>> - JRC’s IPv6 address is now included in the Join Response structure
>> - Separate section specifying MTI algorithms
>> Regards,
>> Mališa
>>> On 15 Jun 2017, at 10:55, [email protected] wrote:
>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
>>> directories.
>>> This draft is a work item of the IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e 
>>> of the IETF.
>>>       Title           : Minimal Security Framework for 6TiSCH
>>>       Authors         : Malisa Vucinic
>>>                         Jonathan Simon
>>>                         Kris Pister
>>>                         Michael Richardson
>>>     Filename        : draft-ietf-6tisch-minimal-security-03.txt
>>>     Pages           : 24
>>>     Date            : 2017-06-15
>>> Abstract:
>>>  This document describes the minimal mechanisms required to support
>>>  secure enrollment of a pledge, a device being added to an IPv6 over
>>>  the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e (6TiSCH) network.  It assumes that
>>>  the pledge has been provisioned with a credential that is relevant to
>>>  the deployment - the "one-touch" scenario.  The goal of this
>>>  configuration is to set link-layer keys, and to establish a secure
>>>  end-to-end session between each pledge and the join registrar who may
>>>  use that to further configure the pledge.  Additional security
>>>  behaviors and mechanisms may be added on top of this minimal
>>>  framework.
>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6tisch-minimal-security/
>>> There are also htmlized versions available at:
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6tisch-minimal-security-03
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-6tisch-minimal-security-03
>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-6tisch-minimal-security-03
>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 6tisch mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
>> _______________________________________________
>> 6tisch mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch

_______________________________________________
6tisch mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch

Reply via email to