On 29.9.2014, at 14.57, Tero Kivinen wrote:
> Markus Stenberg writes:
>>
>>> If homenet needs multicast support then it might be good idea to push
>>> that document forward.
>> How does this solution work with e.g. link-local-only
>> littleconf-TOFU setup?
>
> I have no idea what littleconf-TOF
Ted Lemon wrote:
>> If, OTOH, you can say that you would in fact also require origin
>> authentication, then that is also of interest. (It'd mean that your
>> use case could not be met by the initially chartered work for DICE,
>> and that factoid could be helpful in figuring out h
On 09/29/2014 06:24 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
On Sep 29, 2014, at 9:16 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
If, OTOH, you can say that you would in fact also require
origin authentication, then that is also of interest. (It'd
mean that your use case could not be met by the initially
chartered work for DICE, a
On Sep 29, 2014, at 9:16 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> If, OTOH, you can say that you would in fact also require
> origin authentication, then that is also of interest. (It'd
> mean that your use case could not be met by the initially
> chartered work for DICE, and that factoid could be helpful
> i
On 29/09/14 13:58, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Sep 29, 2014, at 3:50 AM, Stephen Farrell
> wrote:
>> Sooner would be much better than later for that as the DICE WG are
>> right now in the process of (re-)considering whether they can in
>> fact meet their chartered goals on this topic.
>
> Unfortunate
On Sep 29, 2014, at 3:50 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> Sooner would be much better than later for that as the DICE
> WG are right now in the process of (re-)considering whether
> they can in fact meet their chartered goals on this topic.
Unfortunately I think at this point we are distracted by a d
Markus Stenberg writes:
> > There is also ikev2 version of group key management
> > (draft-yeung-g-ikev2), but the draft seems to have expired some time
> > ago. I still think it was supposed to be published.
>
> Ah, interesting, did not know about that. Thanks ;)
>
> > If homenet needs multicast
Hiya,
I've not really been following this discussion sufficient
to comment in general, but just on this part...
On 29/09/14 08:39, Markus Stenberg wrote:
> DTLS has rather sad multicast story too
The DICE WG [1] have also been discussing potential issues
with DTLS and multicast. That discussio
On 25.9.2014, at 14.19, Tero Kivinen wrote:
> Markus Stenberg writes:
>>> Is there something else that’ll work as transport layer security
>>> for multicast, or should we send a request for the IETF leadership
>>> to investigate if this is something that needs to be developed?
>>
>> There is not
