Russ points out that the title is a slightly mis-leading. https://github.com/anima-wg/constrained-join-proxy/issues/51
The document is titled:
_Constrained Join Proxy for Bootstrapping Protocols_
--- abstract
This document extends the work of Bootstrapping Remote Secure Key
Infrastructures (BRSKI) by replacing the Circuit-proxy between
Pledge and Registrar by a stateless/stateful constrained Join
Proxy. The constrained Join Proxy is a mesh neighbor of the
Pledge and can relay a DTLS session originating from a Pledge with only
link-local
addresses to a Registrar which is not a mesh neighbor of the
Pledge.
This document defines a protocol to securely assign a Pledge to a domain,
represented by a Registrar, using an intermediary node between Pledge and
Registrar. This intermediary node is known as a "constrained Join
Proxy". An enrolled Pledge can act as a constrained Join Proxy.
{paragraph two is most definitely wrong, but paragraph one is absolutely
correct}
Russ is wrong in thinking that the join proxy machine is not constrained; it
may well be, and that's why we want to reduce/eliminate state if possible.
(Or rather, move it into the network and into the Registrar)
However, I stubbed my toe on the title while trying to fix things.
It is the (Constrained Join) Proxy for Bootstrapping Protocols.
Not, the: (Constrained Join Proxy) for Bootstrapping Protocols_
I thought about instead:
Stateless Join Proxy for Constrained Bootstrapping Protocols
Or even s/Bootstrapping/Onboarding/
but, actually we document both State and Stateless mechanisms.
Please help me fix the title and from that, the abstract.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list Anima@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
