Hi All
I have published the first draft for the document here is the link to the
draft
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-msahni-ace-cmpv2-coap-transport/ .
As Jim mentioned that adopting this might need change in the ACE WG charter
can we please discuss that in IETF 108 ?

Thanks
Mohit

On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 10:01 AM Mohit Sahni <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Jim,
> Thanks for the feedback. I will go over the EST document and update
> sections around DTLS and proxying and address your other comments. Once
> ready, I will post the draft in ACE WG.
>
> Regards,
> Mohit
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 7:19 PM Jim Schaad <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I suppose that this could go into the ACE working group, but it will
>> require a charter change to do so.
>>
>>
>>
>> I would suggest that you review the EST document with special attention
>> to the sections on DTLS and proxying.  It would also help to have some idea
>> of guidance for when coap or coaps is going to be used.  I am not sure that
>> this strongly exists in CMP as my very vague memory was that it was assumed
>> that all transactions where going to be done over TLS with server
>> validation as a minimum.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Spasm <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Mohit Sahni
>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 4, 2020 10:49 PM
>> *To:* Tomas Gustavsson <[email protected]>
>> *Cc:* LAMPS WG <[email protected]>
>> *Subject:* Re: [lamps] CMPv2/LightWeiight-CMP profile over CoAP transport
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Tomas
>>
>> Thanks for the feedback, I was trying to write it in a way so that it can
>> work for both CMPv2 and LightWeight CMP, I have noted it your feedback and
>> I will try to make it more clear.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Mohit
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 10:40 PM Tomas Gustavsson <[email protected]
>> <[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I noticed that section 4, Proxy Support (good section btw), mentions
>> Announcement messages. These are excluded from the Lightweight
>> specification. Since the LIghtweight specification is mentioned in the
>> beginning, I'm not sure if that's worth mentioning here?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Tomas
>>
>> On 2020-06-04 20:03, Mohit Sahni wrote:
>> > Hi Jim,
>> > There were some discussions about using CoAP as transport for the
>> > Lightweight CMP profile in the last LAMPS WG meeting. After having some
>> > discussions with Hendrik, David, and Andreas I have written an
>> > internet-draft for using CoAP as transport for CMPv2 / Light Weight CMP
>> > Profile. If I am not mistaken, the recommendation was to present this
>> > draft to ACE WG for the review instead of Lamps group, can you please
>> > advice on that?
>> >
>> > Here is the link to the internet-draft that I wrote
>> > https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-msahni-tbd-cmpv2-coap-transport-00.txt
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> > Mohit
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Spasm mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Spasm mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
Ace mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace

Reply via email to