On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 04:43:36PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Toerless Eckert <t...@cs.fau.de> wrote:
> > 2. I would suggest to move RFC7030 to normative references. This would
> make
> > it consistent with lightweight CMP references also being normative, and
> given
> > how the endpoint naming scheme is derived and meant to be backward
> compatible with
> > EST, and EST being explicitly mentioned several times in that context..
>
> Do people implementing the CMP-AE need to know what EST is in detail?
> That doesn't jive with me. I think it can stay informative, but it's really
> a quibble.
Yeah, i was just trying to do formal due diligence walking through the shepherd
template and comparing with the draft. Given how the draft is generalizing
th well-known/<protocol>/ concept introduced with EST and repeatedly refers
to it as the original reference, it seems very much like a formal normative
rference.
But also: BRSKI-AE does not really mandate _any_ particular protocol. If i would
take on your argument, i could equally say that lightweight CMP is just an
informational
reference.
Cheers
Toerless
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
> Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
>
>
>
>
--
---
t...@cs.fau.de
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
Anima@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
