On 2020-10-19, at 19:45, Laurence Lundblade <[email protected]> wrote: > > It is the requirements and design of the end-end system that determines what > the constrained device has to do or not do, not the design of these headers. > Probably it is an overreach to discuss end-end system designs. Maybe it is > just better to remove this paragraph?
The constrained device can delegate most of its tasks (“what is has to do”) to a (sufficiently trusted) less-constrained one (the only tasks that it cannot delegate are the ones needed to properly establish and maintain trust into that device and the communication with it). The paragraph mostly serves as a reminder of how the task delegation pattern can alleviate the concerns that led to the original COSE not having X.509-related primitives. Grüße, Carsten _______________________________________________ COSE mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
