We were discussing the /.well-known/cmp that is in being proposed in 
draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-updates,
We were comparing it to /.well-known/brski and /.well-known/est.
   
https://www.iana.org/assignments/well-known-uris/well-known-uris.xhtml#well-known-uris-1

BRSKI has a sub-registry at:
   
https://www.iana.org/assignments/brski-parameters/brski-parameters.xhtml#brski-well-known-uris

Question 1)
   Why isn't the sub-registry referenced in the /.well-known registry?
   It seems like the sub-registry should be linked in the related
   information.

Question 2)
   Should the CMP document be establishing a registry or not?

--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
]     [email protected]  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [





--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide




Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

Reply via email to