added IANA considerations, and incloude CMP in the example#46
added IANA considerations, and incloude CMP in the example#46
Conversation
|
It looks OK but I am confused. Where are the "BRSKI AN_Proxy Objective Value" and "BRSKI AN_join_registrar Objective Value" registries defined? They don't seem to be in the posted version of draft-ietf-anima-constrained-voucher. Would they be added in the BRSKI section at https://www.iana.org/assignments/brski-parameters/brski-parameters.xhtml? If so there would need to be a cross-reference from https://www.iana.org/assignments/grasp-parameters/grasp-parameters.xhtml#objective-names |
https://github.com/anima-wg/constrained-voucher/pull/272/files |
|
OK, that seems right. Thanks! |
|
Update: per the IETF 118 discussion, the GRASP related content was moved out from cBRSKI (= constrained-voucher) and I think this was equally proposed for constrained-join-proxy. So that would imply this PR needs to be updated/changed to reflect that. |
EskoDijk
added
the
future
|
Added label 'future' now, since the plan is to focus on a bare minimum of CoAP discovery as a solution and do the rest in BRSKI-discovery. Which could include GRASP as a method, in case cBRSKI is used in ANI context. The latter is still a question though, whether cBRSKI is suitable for ANI context and whether anyone will be interested in using it there given that BRSKI was made for that use case. cBRSKI is more fitting to IoT networks for home/commercial where there's no separate network for ANI bootstrap, but the medium is shared control-traffic / application-traffic. |
3 participants
Added IANA considerations for objective values.