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 =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
