On 3/22/2016 9:47 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
On 22 Mar 2016, at 09:10, Juergen Schoenwaelder
<j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 06:10:57PM +0100, Eliot Lear wrote:
Hi Kent,
Thanks for the pointer. The zeroconf draft is cool beans to be sure.
That describes an enrollment mechanism for devices that make use of
802.1AR. Very ANIMAesque. What I'm suggesting, and perhaps it's a bit
late for this draft, is just a statement in this draft along the lines
that "signing and verifying happens at the JSON level; see [ref] for how
to do it", and for extra credit an example would be exceedingly cool.
That way we as developers know what to do (again, I'm neither a JSON nor
netmod expert - just trying to make use of what's there for what I am
expert at (or so I think)).
This I-D is an object encoding specification. Why would this document
have to talk about possible object signatures?
+1
These issues are important but they should IMO be dealt with separately.
Ok. Where should it be described? RFC6087bis?
Regards, Benoit
Thanks, Lada
/js
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
.
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
