peter van der Stok <stokc...@xs4all.nl> wrote: >> * In section 6- All proxies are required by CoAP blocking to re-assemble >> the entire message at the proxy. It can re-block things going to the next >> proxy. While there is no requirement that the proxy get the entire message >> before sending on pieces, this should be common practice and would be >> required for a CoAP/HTTP proxy.
> Agree fully, we need to clarify that. If we are talking about CoAP->HTTP proxy, then clearly that's absolutely true. How could it be any other way? We can't do CoAP block mode over HTTP that I know of :-) There are other proxy types that we need to describe. >> * Should probably add a note in section 6 that any proxy that terminates >> the >> DTLS connection is going to be required to act as an RA. RAs are required >> to have the entire request for adding authentication as necessary. > This is visible in the figure of section 6, but needs elaboration in the > text. I don't understand why we have that paragraph. An end point that terminates the Pledge (D)TLS connection and acts as an RA *IS* a Join Registrar, not a Proxy. -- Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace