The -17 and -18 versions clearly states that it can be used with DTLS 1.3. The 
GitHub version, which I assume will be the basis for the RFC also explains the 
psk identity differences between 1.2 and 1.3, which is great. I don’t think 
there is a need to do anything more.

Regarding DTLS 1.3 support, I don’t think there is any need for a -bis version, 
DTLS 1.3 is to my understanding already supported by the current document 
thanks to IESG.

John

From: Carsten Bormann <c...@tzi.org>
Date: Thursday, 4 November 2021 at 16:14
To: John Mattsson <john.matts...@ericsson.com>
Cc: ace@ietf.org <ace@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ace] Protocol Action: 'Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) 
Profile for Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments 
(ACE)' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize-18.txt)
On 2021-11-04, at 15:08, John Mattsson 
<john.mattsson=40ericsson....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> I think IESG should send any (D)TLS 1.2 only drafts back to the WGs from now 
> on.

Since you made this comment on an approved document (which the IESG no longer 
gets to “send back”), I’m not sure I understand what you are trying to say, but 
I don’t agree with any of the possible interpretations.

> A lot of SDOs and industries are working hard on updating all (D)TLS 
> applications to work also with 1.3. The last thing the world needs is more 
> 1.2 only standards.

I don’t think we need to form a queue behind the completion of DTLS 1.3.
This apparently will take some more time:
https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=8ed7d76d-d14cee6d-8ed797f6-86fc6812c361-b378f81d3777bcda&q=1&e=5985dba9-7ace-4fe4-9ace-256b8615b396&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-editor.org%2Fauth48%2FC321
2021-10-18:  Received email from Eric Rescorla that an open technical issue is 
ongoing.

However, we should already have been working on a -bis for the DTLS profile 
that also supports DTLS 1.3; I can certainly agree with that.

Grüße, Carsten
_______________________________________________
Ace mailing list
Ace@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace

Reply via email to