Hi everyone, In the past weeks I’ve continued my review and now created more Github issues (#22 - #60, see https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/issues?q=is%3Aissue+author%3AEskoDijk) for items that may require discussion. Thanks to Steffen and Thomas for starting to resolve these already before I manage to announce my own review :)
Overall, the PRM approach looks good & useful although a sort of “reality check” would be good to do for using the protocol over low-data links like BLE / NFC. For that I’ve created issue #33 (https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/issues/33). Will the waiting times for the operator of the hand-held registrar-agent be still roughly acceptable, given the data sizes of the multiple messages that need to be exchanged? When the issues are resolved I can also contribute a Pull Request with some readability improvements and nit fixes. Best regards Esko IoTconsultancy.nl | Email/Teams: [email protected] From: Anima <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Fries, Steffen Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2022 08:58 To: [email protected] Subject: [Anima] BRSKI-PRM first review comments Hi all, We’ve got the first comments from the BRSKI-PRM peer review from Esko. Thanks for doing the review. I’ve included them as issue #16-21 on the anima github (https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/issues). Some of them relate to clarifications of the BRSKI-PRM functionality (e.g., usage of nonceless voucher to support offline MASA) and the architectural clarifications (e.g., Join Proxy not necessary) They will be addressed in the next version of the draft. We will continue using githab to collect the comments and also the resolution discussion and provide the information via the mailing list. Best regards Steffen -- Steffen Fries Siemens AG
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
