Hannes Tschofenig <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't have a strong opinion about option #2 appears to be slightly > better.
Oh, I misread your options before. Hannes Tschofenig <[email protected]> wrote: >> (RTT for the lookup vs extra bytes in the URL) >> Are you asking me about these two options: >> Option #1 - going through /.well-known/core >> REQ: GET /.well-known/core?rt=ace.est >> RES: 2.05 Content </est-root >; rt="ace.est" >> Option #2 - using a /.well-known/est URL >> REQ: GET /.well-known/est >> RES: 2.05 Content </est-root>; rt="ace.est" Option 2 is not substituting /.well-known/core for /.well-known/est (and doing resource discovery and then learn one uses /est-root/rv, etc.) but rather not doing resource discovery, just go directly to /.well-known/est/rv, which is what we do in RFC7030. -- Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Ace mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
