COuld any of the folks involved with low power answer one question this
note suggests?
As I understqnd it, low power devices are usually viewed as having
limited capabilities.
Thus, I would normally expect to see their autonomic functions handled
by a proxy, much as a COAP gateway provides connectivity to the rest of
the Internet for such devices.
If that is the case, then I would not expect to run GRASP or ANIMA
bootstrap on the low end devices, but rather on the proxy.
I would instead expect a more specialized protocol (presumabvly over
CoAP) for the last leg. Without ANIMA discovery, etc.
What am I missing?
Yours,
Joel
On 8/3/16 9:55 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
Dear authors of draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra and WG,
The Fairhair alliance focuses on lighting and building automation. Our
security team has been reviewing your draft, and we appreciate the
effort that you are devoting in this direction. We would just like to
highlight at this junction that there is a preference for device
communications from the autonomic device to the registrar to be via COAP
over DTLS rather than HTTP over TLS, primarily because the devices that
we are working with will already have a CoAP implementation. As such,
there is some interest in draft-pritikin-coap-bootstrap-03.txt. We look
forward to seeing that work further developed.
On behalf of the Fairhair security subgroup,
Eliot
ps: as usual, I will encourage fairhair members to directly chime in
with their own views on this matter.
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
Anima@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
Anima@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
