Comment inline
From: Somaraju Abhinav [mailto:abhinav.somar...@tridonic.com]
Sent: Monday, February 6, 2017 12:01 PM
To: Jim Schaad <i...@augustcellars.com>;
draft-somaraju-ace-multic...@tools.ietf.org
Cc: 'ace' <ace@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ace] draft-somaraju-ace-multicast
Hi Mike,
the signature size of RSA is an issue even in the 1024 bit version. The main
wireless protocol, 802.15.4 has a PHY/MAC packet size of 127 bytes so we will
have to fragment IP packets (Bluetooth LE is even smaller at just 27 bytes).
This makes it very difficult to meet the time to
maraju Abhinav; draft-somaraju-ace-multic...@tools.ietf.org
Cc: 'ace'
Subject: RE: [Ace] draft-somaraju-ace-multicast
See comments inline
From: Ace [mailto:ace-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Somaraju Abhinav
Sent: 02 February 2017 03:48
To: Jim Schaad <i...@augustcellars.com>;
draft-somaraj
On 2016-10-10 09:02, Somaraju Abhinav wrote:
> Hi, I have been looking into this draft, which is very well written,
> and I would like a clarification regarding the workflow in figure 1
> of the draft.
>
> This workflow is a bit different to the typical one I imagine for
> c
Hi all,
Thank you all for the feedback on the group communication security discussion.
We noticed that two concerns have been raised with the current specification.
1) Symmetric keys do not provide source authentication. Here, most people on
the mailing list agreed that symmetric keys
Let's try one more time here.
[AS] Good. Much clearer now.
1) If a group of devices share a key, and
2) If some of that group of devices are controllers, and
3) The majority are actuators (e.g. lightbulbs, locks), and,
4) The shared key is the only
