-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org; Michael
Richardson ; ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-coap-est-12 part 2
Hi Panos,
Sorry for the slow response here -- I was in telechat-prep mode last week.
This is in pretty good shape, and I wanted to especially thank you
> Rgs,
> Panos
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ace On Behalf Of Panos Kampanakis (pkampana)
> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 12:18 AM
> To: Jim Schaad ; 'Michael Richardson'
>
> Cc: draft-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org; 'Benjamin Kaduk' ;
&
ter the threads converged.
Panos
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of Jim Schaad
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2019 11:34 PM
To: 'Michael Richardson'
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org; 'Benjamin Kaduk' ;
ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-coap-est-12
Hi all,
below are comments to a subset of not yet concluded review exchanges.
Peter
___
The serverkeygen endpoints could perhaps have some notation to indicate
that the private key is always returned, in addition to the PKCS#7 vs.
pkix-cert
: Ace On Behalf Of Jim Schaad
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2019 11:34 PM
To: 'Michael Richardson'
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org; 'Benjamin Kaduk' ;
ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-coap-est-12 part 2
Authors,
Are we ready to produce a new draft
Kaduk'
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-coap-est-12 part 2
-Original Message-
From: Michael Richardson
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2019 9:38 AM
To: Benjamin Kaduk
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org
-Original Message-
From: Michael Richardson
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2019 9:38 AM
To: Benjamin Kaduk
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-coap-est-12 part 2
Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>> So, on a constrained
On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 05:38:23PM +0100, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> >> I think that we could go to TLS Exporter right now, but it would take
> >> some work.
>
> > I'd rather have both classic-EST and coap-EST benefit than just
> > coap-EST.
>
> So
Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>> So, on a constrained device, I'd like to know what to expect (what to
>> code for). While I do'nt particularly care for server-generated keys,
>> it should probably be specified correctly. I see that the complexity
>> of sorting this means that I think
On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 12:54:12PM +0100, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Peter van der Stok wrote:
> > . if the SignedData is not the outermost container, then we don't
> > care what the relevant Content-Format for it is; we only care about the
> > Content-Format for the
Peter van der Stok wrote:
> . if the SignedData is not the outermost container, then we don't
> care what the relevant Content-Format for it is; we only care about the
> Content-Format for the EnvelopedData.
>
> s/ SignedData is signed/SignedData, placed in the
On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 02:47:10PM +0200, Peter van der Stok wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> Below some additional reactions to your review.
> In some parts the term "suggest" is used, meaning that I am not sure of
> the correctness of my reaction.
> A confirmation/denial would be appreciated in those
[trimming]
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 02:18:22PM +0200, Peter van der Stok wrote:
>
>[RFC7030] recommends the use of additional encryption of the returned
>private key. For the context of this specification, clients and
>servers that choose to support server-side key generation MUST
>
Stok
> > SENT: Tuesday, September 3, 2019 5:18 AM
> > TO: Benjamin Kaduk
> > CC: Jim Schaad ;
> > draft-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org; consulta...@vanderstok.org;
> > ace@ietf.org
> > SUBJECT: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-coap-est-12 part 2
gt;
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Peter van der Stok
> Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2019 12:02 AM
> To: Jim Schaad
> Cc: consulta...@vanderstok.org; 'Benjamin Kaduk' ;
> draft-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-a
0101101001100011...
>
> This looks correct to me.
>
> Jim
>
> FROM: Peter van der Stok
> SENT: Wednesday, September 4, 2019 12:02 AM
> TO: Jim Schaad
> CC: consulta...@vanderstok.org; 'Benjamin Kaduk' ;
> draft-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org; ace@ietf.or
f-ace-coap-est@ietf.org; consulta...@vanderstok.org; ace@ietf.org
> SUBJECT: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-coap-est-12 part 2
>
> Hi Ben,
>
> the last part of the responses to your thorough review.
> Apart from nits you found some "nice" mistakes.
>
I have pruned and tossed in a few [JLS] comments.
Jim
From: Peter van der Stok
Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2019 5:18 AM
To: Benjamin Kaduk
Cc: Jim Schaad ; draft-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org;
consulta...@vanderstok.org; ace@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace
Hi Ben,
the last part of the responses to your thorough review.
Apart from nits you found some "nice" mistakes.
the openssl example make me worry a bit.
See below.
Peter
___
When requesting server-side key generation, the
own perspective
> >
> > -Original Message-----
> > From: Ace On Behalf Of Benjamin Kaduk
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 4:37 PM
> > To: draft-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org
> > Cc: ace@ietf.org
> > Subject: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace
ive
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ace On Behalf Of Benjamin Kaduk
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 4:37 PM
> To: draft-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org
> Cc: ace@ietf.org
> Subject: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-coap-est-12
>
> Hi all,
>
> A good number of
A couple of answers from my own perspective
-Original Message-
From: Ace On Behalf Of Benjamin Kaduk
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 4:37 PM
To: draft-ietf-ace-coap-est@ietf.org
Cc: ace@ietf.org
Subject: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-coap-est-12
Hi all,
A good number
Hi all,
A good number of comments here, though many are just nits. We may need
some more in-depth discussion about only using certificates for client
authentication (immediately below) and how we discuss server-keygen.
Thanks,
Ben
23 matches
Mail list logo
