Hi Francesca: On 2021-07-05, at 15:32, Francesca Palombini <[email protected]> wrote: > > NEW: > There may be use cases were different transport and security protocols
Amazingly, this still says “were” where it needs to say “where”, as if the “were” were invisible :-) > are allowed for the different interactions, and that corresponds to > combining profiles. “Corresponds to” is weirdly weak, but works here. But may be we can fully explain that here before the example (which is just an example): NEWNEW: > , and, if that is not explicitly covered by an existing profile, it > corresponds to combining profiles into a new one. And then we can continue with the example. > For example, a new profile could define that a previously-defined MQTT-TLS > profile is used between the > client and the RS in combination with a previously-defined CoAP-DTLS > profile for > interactions between the client and the AS. It is REQUIRED of the new > profile to specify the > combination and to make sure interoperability and security properties are > achieved. The last sentence is kind of obvious (I hope that the same applies to non-combined profiles), but Section 6.7 is short, so a little superfluity does not hurt. Grüße, Carsten _______________________________________________ Ace mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
