Hi ALLDISPATCH chairs, > On 2024-05-31, at 04:12, Pengshuping (Peng Shuping) <pengshup...@huawei.com> > wrote: > > Please, take a look at the following SecDispatch Wiki for more information > about what we are looking for when you submit your request: > https://wiki.ietf.org/group/secdispatch
I’m not sure that I have included all items from this list in the original request [1] and the ensuing discussion. [1]: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alldispatch/OIecq3rv9HJA-SFC66d6bF6iUyE So let me briefly do this here: • pointers to a draft(s) [0]: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bormann-gendispatch-with-expert-review-00.html • pointers to ongoing/prior discussions See the thread at [1], plus the previous discussion e.g., at [2]. [2]: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/BENVbgmF0px40GPW-zlA4nHI8So • pointers to implementations The “implementation” is in the draft [0], but there are also workarounds in [1a], [1b], [1c] in the form of common boilerplate: [1a]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-core-oscore-edhoc-11#section-8.3-3 [1b]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-revoked-token-notification-07#section-14.4-3 [1c]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-revoked-token-notification-07#section-14.5-3 • pointers to any other background materials One example for why we’d want to involve the designated expert even after IESG review is the registry defined in [2a] (see [2d] for some more technical details, which in turn are refined in [2b] and [2c]). [2a]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7252.html#section-12.2 [2b]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7252.html#section-5.4.1 [2c]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7252.html#section-5.4.2 [2d]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7252.html#section-5.4.6 • summarizing prior engagement with existing WGs The most obvious WG is CoRE, but other WGs are also using registries with similar properties (see ACE above). • summarizing who would want to advance this work Chairs and authors from CoRE and ACE • desired next steps Choose a venue to progress [0] • desired time for discussion 10 minutes. Note that the request is specifically for the proposal in [0]; the thread at [1] also contains additional suggestions that do not yet have such full proposals, but might very well merit separate discussion after some further development. Grüße, Carsten _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list -- rtgwg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to rtgwg-le...@ietf.org
