Hi, the -13 version of draft-ietf-anima-constrained-join-proxy is posted now.
Here is the diff:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-anima-constrained-join-proxy-12=draft-ietf-anima-constrained-join-proxy-13=--html
The -13 is created from a series of pull requests which are not
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and
Approach WG of the IETF.
Title : Constrained Join Proxy for Bootstrapping Protocols
Authors : Michael
Esko Dijk wrote:
> Per the ANIMA/CoRE/IOTops call discussion today, I’m sending the
> pointers to Thread documents and OpenThread source code where CoAP is
> used as the relay protocol (outer layer) of a “Join Proxy” entity.
> There’s a Thread white paper here:
>
Esko Dijk wrote:
--> For completeness the server should also respond with the BRSKI root
resource, which matches the filter. So:
> RES: 2.05 Content
> ;rt=brski.rjp,
> ;rt=brski,
okay.
> The motivation why to do this particular query is not so clear in the
> document.
Esko Dijk wrote:
> For the stateless proxy, it is hard to determine a good rate limit
> number. 1% is not good because it would slow down the joining process
> of a genuine Pledge to a crawl. Some strategies that could work better:
> 1. Initially allow a (near) unlimited use of
Toerless Eckert wrote:
> For the stateful proxy, the pull request from my review i sent last
friday suggests the
> following text:
> To protect itself and the Registrar against malfunctioning Pledges
> and or denial of service attacks, the join proxy SHOULD limit the
>
Hi, I've just rewriten the JPY message to be an actual CoAP header as
discussed at the CORE/IOTOPS meeting on Oct12.
I'll post an email to CORE@ and ANIMA@ about that part, where I have a few
technical questions.
The result of that effort is at:
