On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 11:09:26PM -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote: > Has there been any discussion about Transport ESP and SCHC from lpwan? > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lpwan-architecture/ > > In Sec 5, the assumption is the security envelope is above UDP. e.g. > DTLS and QUIC. No consideration for ESP Transport. > > RFC 8824 only deals with CoAP and not UDP. > > SCHC does not have an IP Protocol Number, thus I can't use it in ESP > Next Header.
The first "SC" is for "static context", i.e., you're supposed to just know, from an external (fixed/static) context, when the header compression is/isn't to be used. Since you "just know" when to use it, no in-band signaling such as IP protocol number is needed, at least in the original envisioned use cases. Do you think you can draw a boundary around your use case such that the "static context" would indicate when to (not) use the compression techniques? -Ben _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
