On 17/07/2018 15:59, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
> > That is so far outside the scope of the autonomic networking
> > infrastructure application of BRSKI that I don't see why we'd even
> > mention it. It's a case
> > that definitely needs to fail hard in the autonomic context.
>
> Actually, the only thing lacking is the sales channel integration.
> If the MASA knows the intended owner, then everything works.
Sure. But that is surely out of scope for the purposes of getting
the BRSKI document into the RFC Editor queue, which is what we need
to do next...
> > If we want to extend the scope of BRSKI to cover BYOD on insecure WiFi,
> I
> > think that's for some other WG.
>
> I don't know if it's for another WG or not, but Owen's document deals with
> this... I'm not sure I'd call it "BYOD", exactly... Bring a not-yet-Owned
> Device, that you'd like to Own, and get pOwned. And the WiFi is insecure,
> because the device doesn't (yet) have accesss to the secure WiFi.
Indeed. But I really don't see why ANIMA would handle this.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
