-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 8:32 AM
To: ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] bringing draft-selander-ace-ake-authz to ACE?
Göran Selander wrote:
> We have been working on lightweight procedures for an IoT device to
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of Stefanie Gerdes
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 4:12 AM
To: ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-35 - unauthorized AS address,
DoS, and privacy
Hi John,
On 09/09/2020 11:36 AM, John Mattsson wrote:
>>> As currently
In any event, if the AS is not one that the client believes that it has some
type of security context to, then it does not seem to be a huge issue. If
C does not trust AS, then it should not be talking to it however it makes
that decision. We currently do not support the four corner model in the
Hey John, comments in line commented with JLS2
-Original Message-
From: John Mattsson
Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2020 12:34 AM
To: Jim Schaad ; ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Assignment of OSCORE Sender and Recipient IDS - was RE: [Ace]
Review of draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile
Hi Jim,
I
John,
I am wondering if this is really the document that should be dealing with this
collision problem. A number of the collisions that might occur are going to
be out of the ACE scope and a more general discussion of the problem should
probably occur in a BIS version of the CoRE OSCORE
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of John Mattsson
Sent: Saturday, September 5, 2020 5:51 AM
To: ace@ietf.org
Subject: [Ace] Review of draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile
Major comment
---
- Asignment of OSCORE Sender and Recipient IDs
I think the specified mechanism
The chairs need to start building the agenda for next Monday. If you want
to be on it then you need to let us know. We are more interested in seeing
items which need to have decisions made than summaries of what has been
done.
Topic
Presenter
Expected Time
Jim
-Original Message-
From: Francesca Palombini
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 5:53 AM
To: Ace Wg
Cc: ace-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: OSCORE Profile IANA questions
Hi all,
I have two quick questions concerning IANA actions to be done for the OSCORE
profile:
1) The framework (-params)
From: Laurence Lundblade
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2020 1:06 PM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: Ace Wg ; cose
Subject: Re: [Ace] [COSE] Gap in registration of application/cwt?
In a CBOR thread it became clear (to me anyway) that in the context of CBOR a
“tag" is not a prefix, badge, ident
From: Cigdem Sengul
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2020 2:25 PM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-prof...@ietf.org; Ace Wg
Subject: Re: [Ace] Review of draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-06
Hello Jim,
I understand that it's an optimization to improve message delay. I wonder also
From: Cigdem Sengul
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2020 10:45 AM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-prof...@ietf.org; Ace Wg
Subject: Re: [Ace] Review of draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-06
I've got that from MQTT v5 spec:
If a Client sets an Authentication Method
From: Cigdem Sengul
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2020 8:50 AM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-prof...@ietf.org; Ace Wg
Subject: Re: [Ace] Review of draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-06
Hello Jim,
Responses inside.
On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 10:50 PM Jim Schaad mailto:i
Section 2.2.3 - /Clean Start to 0/Clean Start to 0, specify the previous
session number/ - I think it should be stated that the session number is
provided, which is what the state is associated with.
Section 2.2.4 - Last sentence. There is a difference between the connect
and re-auth flows in
From: Laurence Lundblade
Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2020 10:58 AM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: cose ; Ace Wg
Subject: Re: [Ace] [COSE] Gap in registration of application/cwt?
On Aug 14, 2020, at 3:35 PM, Jim Schaad mailto:i...@augustcellars.com> > wrote:
From: La
From: Laurence Lundblade
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 1:59 PM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: Ace Wg ; cose
Subject: Re: [COSE] Gap in registration of application/cwt?
Here’s a series of scenarios that I think are legal CWT. These are allowed by
RFC 8392, right?
1) Explicitly tagged
From: COSE On Behalf Of Laurence Lundblade
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2020 1:25 PM
To: Ace Wg ; cose
Subject: [COSE] Gap in registration of application/cwt?
It doesn’t seem clear what the CBOR tagging requirements are when
application/cwt is used to indicate a message is a CWT.
This
> -Original Message-
> From: Ace On Behalf Of Panos Kampanakis
> (pkampana)
> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2020 7:05 AM
> To: Brockhaus, Hendrik ; Benjamin Kaduk
> ; Michael Richardson
> Cc: Mohit Sahni ; steffen.fr...@siemens.com;
> ace@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Ace] IETF 108 tentative
From: Francesca Palombini
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 4:59 AM
To: Jim Schaad ; draft-ietf-ace-key-groupc...@ietf.org
Cc: Ace@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Review of ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-07
Hi Jim,
Thanks for your reply! Comments inline.
Francesca
On 16 July 2020 at 23:01:47
> -Original Message-
> From: Paul Kyzivat
> Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2020 1:24 PM
> To: draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize@ietf.org
> Cc: General Area Review Team
> Subject: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize-12
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this
> -Original Message-
> From: Francesca Palombini
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2020 2:25 PM
> To: Jim Schaad ; draft-ietf-ace-key-
> groupc...@ietf.org
> Cc: ace@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Review of ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-07
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> Thank you so much
I had been holding off doing an adoption call waiting for a formal request
to adopt it. However, given that this is now a dependency for three
different WG documents I think we need to do this now.
Adoption call for
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bormann-core-ace-aif/
This document
> -Original Message-
> From: Ace On Behalf Of Christian Amsüss
> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2020 8:12 AM
> To: ace@ietf.org
> Subject: [Ace] 4.01 Get A Token From There, discovery-/form-driven
> applications and tokens opaque to the client
>
> Hello ACE,
>
> piecing together parts of the
We are collecting agenda items for IETF 108. We have a 100 minute slot at
the meeting and I am sure that it will be overflowing. If you want to be on
the agenda please let the chairs know.
Please include the following data in your agenda request:
1. The document(s) that the presentation
> -Original Message-
> From: Olaf Bergmann
> Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 1:25 AM
> To: Jim Schaad
> Cc: 'Benjamin Kaduk' ; 'Carsten Bormann' ;
> ace@ietf.org; draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-dtls-aut
> -Original Message-
> From: Benjamin Kaduk
> Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2020 9:25 AM
> To: Carsten Bormann
> Cc: Olaf Bergmann ; draft-ietf-ace-dtls-
> authorize@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize-09
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at
> -Original Message-
> From: Carsten Bormann
> Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2020 8:35 AM
> To: Jim Schaad
> Cc: draft-bormann-core-ace-...@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Ace] Extended REST model comment
>
> On 2020-06-30, at 16:43, Jim Schaad wrote:
> &
In trying to formalize a policy for the RD testing, I ended up with
something that I think needs to be noted in this section. There is a
difference between the following statements:
Access is granted to resources created by the client.
Access is granted to resources that could have been created
* Section 1 para 1 - I have a vague memory of deciding that we were going to
become CBOR only with this document per the argument from Carsten. I did
not find this in the minutes so this could easily be some other document
that I am thinking of.
* Section 2 - I have a problem with Figure 1 in
This is a clean review so the last one most likely still applies.
* From my review of the group comm document. There needs to be an easy way
to talk about a single entry in the array of all permissions. Some times
you only want to ask for one thing and not deal with permissions for any
other
> -Original Message-
> From: Ace On Behalf Of Francesca Palombini
> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2020 6:45 AM
> To: Carsten Bormann ; Ace Wg
> Cc: Marco Tiloca
> Subject: Re: [Ace] AIF as discussed today (Re: I-D Action: draft-bormann-core-
> ace-aif-08.txt)
>
> Hi Carsten,
>
> Thanks
That corresponds to what I expected to see.
> -Original Message-
> From: Ace On Behalf Of Carsten Bormann
> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 8:56 AM
> To: ace@ietf.org
> Subject: [Ace] IANA considerations for authz-info RT
>
> Marco and I still have to do the bike shedding on the actual name
I have posted the minutes for the meeting today. If you want to make any
change let me know.
Jim
___
Ace mailing list
Ace@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
Francesca, Cigdem,
One of the things that you might want to consider as part of you problem
with adapting to AIF is that the profile may want to re-define the bit
string so that instead of using the CoAP request codes, you use your set of
options allowing for a tighter encoding.
Jim
Let's see if I can get the mailing list right this time
-Original Message-
From: Jim Schaad
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 3:02 PM
To: 'draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-prof...@ietf.org'
Cc: 'c...@ietf.org'
Subject: Review draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-05
* Style Issue. "Abbreviations s
* Does 'joining_path' contain the path or the full URI to the joining
resource. Is it possible for the Group Manager Administration to be on a
different server (or via a different address) from the Group Manager itself?
Path tends to me to say only path.
* Section 2.3.2.1 - I think it makes more
We should make sure to keep draft-tiloca-core-oscore-directory in mind for
this. It has a relation link defined for the Authorization server.
Jim
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of Carsten Bormann
Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 7:52 AM
To: Seitz Ludwig
Cc: Benjamin Kaduk ;
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN=Jim Schaad;SENT-BY="mailto:daniel.miga...@ericsson.com":mailto:a
ce-cha...@ietf.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=ace@ietf.o
rg:mailto:ace@ietf.org
ATTACH:CID:39118A2BE2F7CD4294B45129D13A735D@namprd15.prod.o
* Section 2 - I would like more clarification on the subject as being
derived implicitly from the armor and is a single entity rather than
multiple entities. If we think that we want to do multiple subjects then
that needs to be discussed.
* Section 2.1 - The model does not current deal with
That is not an issue. If you ask for adoption, we can adopt any draft with any
name.
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of Carsten Bormann
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2020 9:12 AM
To: Ace Wg
Subject: Re: [Ace] AIF as a suggestion in key-groupcomm; AIF in MQTT
On 2020-05-18, at 17:21,
I have posted the minutes - review and comment as appropriate.
___
Ace mailing list
Ace@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
As I said, I have not fully thought it out. A better way to state this might
be - this token uses the same key as rather than implying overriding.
-Original Message-
From: Olaf Bergmann
Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2020 11:32 PM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: 'Francesca Palombini' ; 'Ace Wg'
Subject
I have not had a chance to think this out and get all of the implications
right, but my understanding is that what we were trying to avoid was having
the same secret key/public key present on the RS in more than one token.
This simplifies what the RS needs to do. However, I am now under the
Agenda has been uploaded to the meeting. Note that the list of upcoming
meetings seems to have changed it’s set of links and for me is not giving a
jabber room link nor a WebEx link. Information on both can be found in the
agenda.
Jim
From: Ace On Behalf Of Daniel Migault
Sent:
-Original Message-
From: Michael Richardson
Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2020 11:07 AM
To: Jim Schaad ; 'Ace'
Subject: Re: [Ace] draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz
Jim Schaad wrote:
> I have much the same problem. While a client could find an AS which
> would authenticate the cli
is an AS.
Jim
From: Ace On Behalf Of Peter van der Stok
Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2020 12:26 AM
To: Benjamin Kaduk
Cc: Jim Schaad ; Olaf Bergmann ;
'Ace'
Subject: Re: [Ace] draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz
HI all,
I agree about the authorization/trust problem.
My request concerns something more
on the back side.
Getting trust in a local AS seems to be a bootstrapping problem.
Jim
-Original Message-
From: Carsten Bormann
Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 10:38 PM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: Benjamin Kaduk ; Olaf Bergmann ; Peter van
der Stok ; peter van der Stok
; Ace
Subject: Re: [Ace] draft
as
well put in a name for the AS as well. I suppose you could get by with a
shared secret but that does not seem to be a good way to build up the
system.
Jim
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Kaduk
Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 9:09 PM
To: Olaf Bergmann
Cc: Peter van der Stok ; Jim Schaad
What do you expect to see? By default a client needs to know that something
is an AS and have a key to interact with that AS.
Jim
From: Ace On Behalf Of Peter van der Stok
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 11:57 PM
To: Ace
Subject: [Ace] draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz
Hi authz
I have uploaded minutes to the Datatracker. Please review and comment with
corrections.
Jim
___
Ace mailing list
Ace@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
Reminder - If you want to have input on when the next two meetings are going
to be, you need to fill out the doodle poll.
Jim
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of Jim Schaad
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 8:51 PM
To: ace@ietf.org
Subject: [Ace] Scheduling additional interim meetings
Daniel and I would like to schedule two additional interim meetings to occur
in May and June. I have created a doodle poll for the times that I know
that I am available and would like to get people to fill it in. The poll
has options for May dates in it. The June dates would be 4 weeks later so
AM
To: Jim Schaad ; 'Seitz Ludwig'
; 'Mike Jones' ; 'Chuck
Mortimore'
Cc: chuck.mortim...@visa.com; cwt-reg-rev...@ietf.org;
draft-ietf-ace-oauth-au...@ietf.org; drafts-expert-rev...@iana.org; ace@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Ace] [Cwt-reg-review] [IANA #1158953] Requested review for IANA
I had a weird weekend trying to get coverage testing up for my Observe
implementation and in the process found out that it had not implemented the
required congestion control. As part of this I had to go back and do a
careful read of RFC 7641 to get things right in my code and following that I
No you should not need to make any changes in the document. This will be taken
care of by the RFC Editor.
Jim
From: Ace On Behalf Of Seitz Ludwig
Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2020 3:35 AM
To: Mike Jones ; Chuck Mortimore
; hannes.tschofe...@arm.com
Cc: chuck.mortim...@visa.com;
There is a missing role/functionality that needs to be added to the
document. "proxy signature checker" has the ability to get the public keys
associated with the different members of the group but does not get any
access to the symmetric keying material
Jim
Forgot to cc the group
-Original Message-
From: Jim Schaad
Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2020 1:48 PM
To: 'draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-osc...@ietf.org'
Subject: Review of draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-oscore-05
* Introduction: In para 2, the second sentence needs to be re-written. If
you
Here is a new review - the sooner you ask about anything that is unclear the
more likely I will remember what I was referring to.
Jim
* In figure 4: The CDDL is not correct. "2*role" should be "2*role:tstr"
or role should be defined as a separate item
* Section 3.2 - The third to last
Hannes,
This is going to be a long email and I hope that I do not get too many
things wrong in the process of getting it written up.
So the question that you raised is can the current MQTT profile use the
existing OAuth and ACE-OAuth protocols. My assertion is that the answer is
yes and I will
From: Cigdem Sengul
Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 5:35 AM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-prof...@ietf.org; Ace Wg
Subject: Re: Comments on the MQTT draft
Hello Jim,
Comments inline.
Yes, I can see this can be problematic but this was to avoid the broker keeping
From: Cigdem Sengul
Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2020 3:30 PM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-prof...@ietf.org; Ace Wg
Subject: Re: Comments on the MQTT draft
Hello Jim,
Comments inline.
On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 7:04 PM Jim Schaad mailto:i...@augustcellars.com> > wro
It appears that the logistics for the upcoming meeting in Vancouver are
going to be more complicated than is normal. To start with at the present
time it appears that neither of the chairs are going to be physically
present for the meeting.
Please let the chairs know if you desire to do a
1. I want to verify that the following is the desired statement: There is
a strong preference that TLS not use PSK for authentication. This follows
from the recommendation to use TLS:Anon-MQTT:ace for the authentication
option. I have no problems with this statement, I just want to be sure
From: Laurence Lundblade
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 7:38 AM
To: Henk Birkholz
Cc: Jim Schaad ; Smith, Ned ;
Michael Richardson ; r...@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org;
c...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Rats] [Cbor] [Ace] RATS Entity Attestation Tokens (EAT) - to be a
CWT or not to be a CWT?
So
e
willing to absorb that.
Jim
-Original Message-
From: Henk Birkholz
Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2020 11:35 PM
To: Jim Schaad ; 'Smith, Ned' ;
'Michael Richardson' ; r...@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org;
c...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Cbor] [Ace] [Rats] RATS Entity Attestation Tokens (EAT) - to
{ I found Jim's very interesting email very hard to read without good
quoting, I'm repeating the important part }
henk> 2.) go to ACE and ask for an "unsigned token" option, or
Jim Schaad wrote:
jls> I don't have a problem with this, I am
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of Henk Birkholz
Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 2:33 PM
To: Jim Schaad ; r...@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org;
c...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] RATS Entity Attestation Tokens (EAT) - to be a CWT or not to
be a CWT?
Hi Jim,
I'll take a stake into my
Henk,
Well you have definitely written a message designed to get a response from me.
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of Henk Birkholz
Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 10:41 AM
To: r...@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org; c...@ietf.org
Subject: [Ace] RATS Entity Attestation Tokens (EAT) - to be
Hannes,
I am having a bit of an issue over the last paragraph below and I am not sure
exactly where the boundary is supposed to be between OAuth and ACE anymore.
From the comments that you made during the development of the ACE OAuth
framework, there was a big effort to try and make sure that
From: Ace On Behalf Of Marco Tiloca
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 6:08 AM
To: Michael Richardson ; Jim Schaad
; ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] Jim's Proposal on legal requestor
Hi!
Jim, I think now I understand your idea and it makes sense to me.
Some comments in line below
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 5:17 AM
To: Jim Schaad ; ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] Jim's Proposal on legal requestor
clarifying question.
Jim Schaad wrote:
> I do not seem to have been doing a good
I have posted up the minutes for todays interim
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2020-ace-04/materials/minutes-i
nterim-2020-ace-04-202002251100
___
Ace mailing list
Ace@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
-Original Message-
From: Marco Tiloca
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2020 2:14 PM
To: Jim Schaad ;
draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-osc...@ietf.org
Cc: 'Ace Wg'
Subject: Re: Scope question
Hi Jim,
On 2020-02-24 19:02, Jim Schaad wrote:
> I was starting to code up the encoding of sc
I was starting to code up the encoding of scope and wanted to clarify what
the encoding is.
The text appears to say that the encoding is:
scope = [ groupId: tstr, ?[* role : any ]]
I was expecting this to be more along the lines of
scope = [ + scope_item ]
scopeItem = [ groupId: tstr, ?[* role
: Francesca Palombini
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2020 11:55 PM
To: Mike Jones ; Jim Schaad
; 'Seitz Ludwig'
Cc: 'Ace Wg'
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: Access token question
Thanks all! Section 8.13 of the framework is exactly what I was looking for, I
don’t know how I did not see it. A bit
You are missing something
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-33#section-8.13
defined here
From: Francesca Palombini
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2020 4:37 AM
To: Seitz Ludwig ; Mike Jones
; Jim Schaad
Cc: Ace Wg
Subject: Access token question
Hi,
Quick
-Original Message-
From: Marco Tiloca
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2020 10:32 AM
To: Jim Schaad ;
draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-osc...@ietf.org
Cc: ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-oscore
Hi Jim,
On 2020-01-31 16:46, Jim Schaad wrote:
>
> -Original M
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of Francesca Palombini
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 6:43 AM
To: Benjamin Kaduk ; draft-ietf-ace-oscore-prof...@ietf.org; Ace
Wg
Subject: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-08
Hi Ben,
Thank you so much for this very
This is not a finished review, but I wanted to get it out
Jim
Section 1 - last paragraph - the first sentence in this paragraph is giving
me fits trying to understand it. I would suggest something, but I really
don't understand it.
General - Update the reference to RFC 7049 to the bis draft.
and decode if there needs to be some text on
encoding in a JSON environment or not.
Jim
From: Ace On Behalf Of Jim Schaad
Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2020 3:35 PM
To: 'Brian Campbell' ; 'Seitz Ludwig'
Cc: 'Roman Danyliw' ; oauth-ext-rev...@ietf.org; 'Daniel
Migault' ; drafts-lastc...@i
Cc: Ludwig Seitz ; Roman Danyliw ;
oauth-ext-rev...@ietf.org; Daniel Migault ; Jim
Schaad ; Benjamin Kaduk ; ace@ietf.org;
drafts-lastc...@iana.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] Requested review for IANA registration in
draft-ietf-ace-oauth-params
Thanks Ludwig,
On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 8:20 AM
-Original Message-
From: Marco Tiloca
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 9:21 AM
To: Jim Schaad ;
draft-tiloca-ace-oscore-gm-ad...@ietf.org
Cc: ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] remarks on draft-tiloca-ace-oscore-gm-admin-00
Hi Jim,
Thanks for your reply, see more comments inline
From: Cigdem Sengul
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 4:44 AM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-prof...@ietf.org; Ace Wg
Subject: Re: [Ace] draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile - Validating a subscription
is in scope
Hello,
It gets interesting when the scope is more
From: Cigdem Sengul
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 8:25 AM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-prof...@ietf.org; Ace Wg
Subject: Re: [Ace] Review of draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-03
Thank you for this review, Jim.
Responses inline.
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 10:33 PM Jim
From: Cigdem Sengul
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 6:24 AM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-prof...@ietf.org; Ace Wg
Subject: Re: [Ace] draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile - Validating a subscription
is in scope
Hello Jim,
Topic filter and permission filter matching
;
oauth-ext-rev...@ietf.org; Daniel Migault ; Jim
Schaad ; Benjamin Kaduk ; ace@ietf.org;
drafts-lastc...@iana.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] Requested review for IANA registration in
draft-ietf-ace-oauth-params
Thanks Ludwig,
On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 8:20 AM Seitz Ludwig mailto:ludwig.se
I have run across an interesting question for doing validation of
subscriptions that I would like to get an opinion on.
When doing a publish, there is not an issue. One simply takes the set of
values in the scope field as topic filters and checks the publication topic
against the set of
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of Marco Tiloca
Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2020 8:08 AM
To: Jim Schaad ;
draft-tiloca-ace-oscore-gm-ad...@ietf.org
Cc: ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] remarks on draft-tiloca-ace-oscore-gm-admin-00
Hi Jim,
Thanks a lot for this review!
We have
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Kaduk
Sent: Thursday, January 9, 2020 1:22 PM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: 'Olaf Bergmann' ;
draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize-09
On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 12:52:56PM -0800
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Kaduk
Sent: Thursday, January 9, 2020 12:27 PM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: AD review of draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize-09
On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 08:36:54PM -0800, Jim Schaad wrote
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Kaduk
Sent: Thursday, January 9, 2020 12:17 PM
To: Olaf Bergmann
Cc: Jim Schaad ; ace@ietf.org;
draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize-09
On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 12:32:40PM +0100
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of Olaf Bergmann
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2020 2:03 AM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: ace@ietf.org; 'Benjamin Kaduk' ;
draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize-09
Jim,
Jim Schaad writes
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Kaduk
Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2020 3:40 PM
To: draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize@ietf.org
Cc: ace@ietf.org
Subject: AD review of draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize-09
Hi all,
Some high-level remarks before delving into the section-by-section
comments:
2.2.2 - para 1, the last sentence seems to imply that the first connection
to publish to authz-info is not being done over a TLS connection. But the
sentence before that states that a TLS connection MUST be used for this.
Perhaps s/and is expected to try reconnecting over TLS./and reconnects,
From: Ace On Behalf Of Seitz Ludwig
Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2019 11:52 PM
To: 'elwynd' ; Ludwig Seitz ; Elwyn
Davies ; gen-...@ietf.org
Cc: last-c...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-ace-oauth-params@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of
a link from the mapping registry to the OAuth
registry.
Jim
-Original Message-
From: Ludwig Seitz
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2019 3:26 AM
To: Jim Schaad ; 'Daniel Migault'
Cc: ace@ietf.org; Benjamin Kaduk ; 'Roman Danyliw'
Subject: Re: FW: [IANA #1157486] Last Call:
(Authentication
From: Cigdem Sengul
Sent: Thursday, December 5, 2019 2:42 AM
To: Jim Schaad
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-prof...@ietf.org; Ace Wg
Subject: Re: [Ace] Certificate processing for MQTT
Hello Jim,
Thank you for your email. I am in the process of revising the document for the
December
I got to the point of needing to start producing and validating certificates
for MQTT and started running into some questions as well as starting to
pickup some odd information that this document does not point to.
1. Should probably reference the mqtt(s) URI scheme, I am however somewhat
Daniel,
I don’t understand why you want to follow a different specification for the
error interactions in this case. I don’t see any reason not to following
[ace-oauth-authz] but using JSON for the errors.
Jim
From: Ace On Behalf Of Daniel Migault
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2019
For those people who were on Jabber yesterday during the meeting, I made a
characterization of Francesca's Pub-Sub draft which was wrong, and she did
not tell me I was an idiot like she should have.
When you are doing encrypted pub-sub there are three problems that need to
be addressed:
1. Get
This is just going to be a high level review on how things are done rather
than a detailed review on each line of text.
1. - Go and read that CoRE Pub-Sub update document - you know the one that
Klaus and friends have not managed to get written since the model proposal
was done way back when.
2.
1 - 100 of 280 matches
Mail list logo
