On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 02:09:08PM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 02/08/2018 12:30, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>
> > --
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-16: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 11:44:55PM +0200, Eliot Lear wrote:
> One thought:
>
> I think the simplest way to address the bulk of both Adam’s and Warren’s
> concern is to require the device to emit via whatever management interface
> exists, upon request, a voucher that it has signed with its own
Not Eric, but playing that role for a bit...
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 04:31:45PM +0100, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> Thanks Eric, inline
>
> This file is:
> https://github.com/anima-wg/autonomic-control-plane/blob/master/draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane/16-eric-rescorla-reply.txt
>
> The
t; http://tools.ietf.org//rfcdiff?url1=https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-16.txt=https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-19.txt
>
> Cheers
> Toerless
>
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 05:30:10PM -0700, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 12:06:07AM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> https://tinyurl.com/yylruorn contains an updated diff against -24.
>
> Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote:
> > Section 5.2
>
> > application/voucher-cms+json The request is a "YA
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 01:02:45PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> >> There does not otherwise seem to be any risk from this compromise to
> >> devices which are already deployed, or which are sitting locally in
> >> bo
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 09:10:26PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> >> Are you asking for a forward reference to 10.2? I will add this.
> >> I think that section 10.2 is pretty clear about this.
> >> I don't thi
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 03:05:44PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> https://tinyurl.com/yylruorn contains a diff against -24.
>
> Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote:
> > Section 5.8.1
>
> doc>A log data file is returned consisting of all log entr
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 03:30:13PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> WG: there is a chunk of Security Considerations text here that I hope
> many will read.
>
>
> Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote:
> > Section 11.4
>
> > It is not en
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 04:23:54PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote:
> > Section 13.2
>
> > I think CDDL needs to be a normative reference, as does RFC 7231. RFC
> > 2473 is listed but not referenced in the
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 10:05:13AM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> >> domainID: The domain IDentity is a unique hash based upon a
> >> Registrar's certificate. If the certificate includes the
> >> SubjectKeyIde
Apparently I only have one comment buried inline. We must be making
progress :)
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 05:07:46PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> doc> The authentication of the BRSKI-MASA connection does not affect the
> doc> vouch
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:58:45PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> >> + directly. This is because BRSKI pledges MUST use the CSR Attributes
>
> > (This may not need to be a 2119 MUST since we cite 7030.)
>
> It turns out, in
Whoops, this one apparently got skipped over amid some other deluge in my
inbox; sorry.
On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 04:09:50PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> > That specific construction would seem like an "optional feature" per
> >
On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 02:24:51PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Michael Richardson wrote:
> > I hoping for some discussion about this comment that I previously
> > responded to, but it probably got buried.
>
> Actually, you did respond on July 20, in an email that I thought to
On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 04:17:17PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> https://tinyurl.com/yylruorn contains a diff against -24.
>
> Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote:
> > [disclaimer: some of these comments get pretty blunt at the end; it's a
> > lon
ybe not that need replies.)
> I'm going to use this email to deal with Ben's comments which I think we
> already dealt with other edits, then I'll deal with low-hanging fruit, and
> then decide how to deal with the desire for a high-level security analysis.
>
> Benjamin Kaduk via D
> https://tinyurl.com/y2kmjqmm for diffs aginst -26.
> (also includes changes for Alexey)
> Submitting -27 in process.
>
> Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> >> This was asked by Eric as well.
> >> It's the Subject Key Identifier that we want.
> >>
editorial nits at the end of this message.
> Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote:
> > Thanks for the time and attention to detail put into addressing my
> > previous Discuss and Comment points. I have one new Discuss-level
> > point and one that I think may
Trimming heavily, with great thanks for the numerous updates...
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 05:50:10PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> > I also have some more comments that didn't make it into my ballot
> position;
> > please consider them
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 07:08:49AM -0700, Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote:
>
>
> --
> DISCUSS:
> --
>
> % (1) The text of the docum
636a8249fd1366f
>
> BTW: I haven't heard from Roman since IETF107.
> I am also converting to v3 format now, so there are some slight formatting
> changes. (*->o, some extra spaces in places)
>
> I have addressed all of your comments, and I've checked that all the -29
> comm
-autonomic-control-plane/draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane.19.3.txt
> >They are also summarized under section (3) of the -20 changelog.
> >
> > -> The total changes -19 to -20 are of course:
> >
> >
> > http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/rfcdiff.p
Hi Toerless,
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 04:17:44PM +0100, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> Thanks, Michael
>
> Brian,
>
> At IETF106 i thought if Bens review would remove all discuss, we would have
> finished IESG review, but that is not the case because two of the
> IESG members that had approved ACP
To confirm: I should not be waiting for any other reviews before I look at
the -38? (What with it being outgoing-AD-season I can't promise an exact
date, but can bump it up the list a bit.)
Thanks,
Ben
___
Anima mailing list
Anima@ietf.org
Hi Michael,
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 10:10:52PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
>
> Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote:
> > Unfortunately, it seems that the "pinned-domain-cert" in the issued
> voucher
> > is the registrar's cert, not the CA
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 08:02:07AM -0700, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>
> I am even willing to produce an updated example voucher artifact myself, if
> that would help expedite things -- I believe I already have the needed
> keys/certs locally from my review of the -39. As an alternate o
On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 02:25:30PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Hi, I had a discussion with Max this morning. He reminded me of the back and
> forth that we made on what thing would be pinned.
> We have come up with the following text changes.
>
> There are three pieces: the Registrar,
3:32:44PM -0700, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> > I think A.6 is an interesting idea and don't want to drop the idea, but the
> > current state of the text in A.6 is better suited for a separate doc than
> > inclusion in this one. I suppose I could try to do a shorter rewrite that
> > mi
On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 04:43:31PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> On 2020-10-01 6:36 p.m., Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote:
> > A couple of the new bits in the -29 might benefit from targeted review
> > (noted
> > inline), e.g., for CDDL, TSV, or INT-specific aspe
Hi Toerless,
Also inline, but I think we're in pretty good shape overall.
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 02:59:56PM +0200, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> Thanks, Ben
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 04:46:31PM -0700, Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 09:47:59PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Ben, is this DISCUSS comment still alive?
>From memory, I think it's been resolved.
I'm sure that a discuss about whether/how the RPL root is automatically
determined got resolved for *some* document, but am not 100% sure
Hi Brian, Michael,
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 02:14:24PM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 16-Jun-20 12:20, Michael Richardson wrote:
> >
> > Hi, I have had a few conversations with Toerless who is trying to deal with
> > the feedback on the ACP document.
> >
> > An item that has come up is the
Hi Éric,
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 10:43:00AM +, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
> As the shepherding AD for this document, I am happy to see recent technical
> discussions on this document. OTOH, I do not observe any convergence to
> remove the pending DISCUSS.
>
>
>
> The 2nd IETF Last Call
My apologies for commenting before having caught up on the whole thread
(I've been pretty sluggish all week and don't want to get even further
behind.)
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 03:58:21PM -0700, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> Taking a step back from the substantive issue, it seems to me that to the
>
On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 12:28:25PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Russ Housley wrote:
> > One cannot send email to the character string in this specification, so
> > it should not be carried in the rfc822name.
>
> You can send email to that character string if you configure the
Hi Brian,
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 05:11:30PM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> (Back on line after a couple of days spent moving apartments.)
(and me after getting slowed down by being sick)
> On 17-Jun-20 14:44, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> > Hi Brian, Michael,
>
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 01:22:22AM +, Roman Danyliw wrote:
> >
> > > ** Section 6.11.1.1.2. A mechanism for failed ACP detected using a
> > > secure channel protocol is noted for IPSec (with IKEv2 Dead Peer
> > > Detection). What is the equivalent for DTLS?
> >
> > Good question. If you
On Sun, Apr 03, 2022 at 10:36:01PM -0400, Sean Turner wrote:
>
>
> > On Apr 1, 2022, at 02:25, Brockhaus, Hendrik
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Von: Russ Housley
> >> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 31. März 2022 19:53
> >>
> >>> On Mar 31, 2022, at 12:20 PM, Brockhaus, Hendrik
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 10:46:42AM +1300, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 19-Jan-22 06:02, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker wrote:
[...]
> > Should there be any linkage with SUIT WG ?
>
> As noted above, IoT (constrained) devices are considered out of scope,
> so formally, no. However, a designer would
Hi Brian,
On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 01:38:42PM +1300, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Hi Ben,
> ...
>
> > --
> > DISCUSS:
> > --
> >
> > It looks like the indentation
On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 09:46:01PM +0200, Warren Parad wrote:
> I don't know if this is relevant, but jwks.json isn't registered, because
> it doesn't have to be at that location. The
> /.well-known/openid-configuration discovery document, which is registered,
> uses the jwks_uri property to
On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 12:09:03PM +0200, Christian Amsüss wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> (CC'ing ACE list because what I think will be the larger part of the
> thread is hopefully relevant)
>
> > > there a generalization of the IEEE identifiers that also makes
> > > sense for constrained but
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-22: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-19: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-28: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-31: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-35: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-40: Yes
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-39: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-29: Yes
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-28: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-27: No Record
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-grasp-api-08: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-asa-guidelines-06: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please
Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-asa-guidelines-05: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer
57 matches
Mail list logo
