Dear ANIMAers, This message starts the two-week (*) ANIMA Working Group Last
Call to advance draft-ietf-anima-brski-cloud-05, which specifies the behavior
of a BRSKI Cloud Registrar, and how a pledge can interact with a BRSKI Cloud
Registrar when bootstrapping. This document's intended status
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 : BRSKI Cloud Registrar
Authors : Owen Friel
Jürgen, you did a great review back in April.
We recently made a bunch of revisions to constrained-join-proxy.
In the end, we have replaced our custom "JPY" encapsulations with a CoAP
header. The cost in the end is two bytes, and the result is that it is
identical to RFC9031.
We have also
Hi, I completed two examples, one using the augment method that we were
using, which you pointed out was broken. Thank you for helping with this,
and I hope you have a moment to review my test files... probably there is a
*third* way that works better.
What we want is to be able to write
To follow up finally.
To recap: we have been doing A:grouping-A, B:grouping-B-augment-group-A, and
now are facing
C:grouping-C-augment-group-B, which seems to be wrong.
We start with RFC8366's YANG for voucher.
It is augmented in RFC8995 to create voucher-request.
What I am hearing is that we
