3.4.2013 15:44, Miika Komu kirjoitti:
Hi,
should we fix the CERT parameters in RFC5201-bis to certain base
exchange packets?
I would not fix the packets that may use the CERT parameter. In my
opinion it is the extensions, such as the registration, own business in
which packet they use the CERT parameter. Fixing the packets could also
be trouble some for some future extensions. I would not fix the packets
but rather I would give recommendations, like the one existing one that
it may not be wise to put CERT parameters into I1.
To integrate seamlessly with RFC5203-bis registration, R1-I2 is mostly
likely a more ideal combination than R2-I2?
On 04/03/2013 11:13 AM, Samu Varjonen wrote:
Hi all,
I have some cycles that I can use to get this document forward. This is
the initial submission it does not differ from the RFC6253. What would
be the next steps for this document? Has anyone raised any
comments/questions that should be fixed before this can be taken
forward? To my knowledge there are none.
BR,
Samu Varjonen
On 01/04/13 21:30, [email protected] wrote:
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
This draft is a work item of the Host Identity Protocol Working
Group of the IETF.
Title : Host Identity Protocol Certificates
Author(s) : Tobias Heer
Samu Varjonen
Filename : draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis-00.txt
Pages : 11
Date : 2013-03-22
Abstract:
The CERT parameter is a container for digital certificates. It is
used for carrying these certificates in Host Identity Protocol (HIP)
control packets. This document specifies the certificate parameter
and the error signaling in case of a failed verification.
Additionally, this document specifies the representations of Host
Identity Tags in X.509 version 3 (v3) and SPKI certificates.
The concrete use of certificates including how certificates are
obtained, requested, and which actions are taken upon successful or
failed verification are specific to the scenario in which the
certificates are used. Hence, the definition of these scenario-
specific aspects are left to the documents that use the CERT
parameter.
This document updates RFC 5201.
The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis
There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis-00
Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
_______________________________________________
Hipsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
_______________________________________________
Hipsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
_______________________________________________
Hipsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
_______________________________________________
Hipsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
