Mohit
Thanks for the update. I'm looking forward to the discussion in ACE.
Hendrik
Von: Mohit Sahni
Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. Juli 2020 00:06
Hi All
I have published the first draft for the document here is the link to the draft
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-msahni-ace-cmpv2-coap-trans
> Von: Ace Im Auftrag von Benjamin Kaduk
>
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 04:31:05PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> >
> > Mohit Sahni wrote:
> > > To give some background, this draft is an extension of Light Weight
> > CMP
> > > Profile (
> > >
> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.
Hi Panos,
thnaks for you feedback.
> Von: Panos Kampanakis (pkampana)
>
> Hi,
>
> > Looking into Mohits draft, cmp-over-coap is much simpler than
> est-over-coaps, as CMP does not need any binding to an underlying (D)TLS
> handshake.
>
> Not sure that is accurate. And EST does not bind to the
Thanks to Mohit for his request on rechartering and adoption. I support this.
Hendrik
Mohit Sahni , Montag, 5. Oktober 2020 09:21
Hello Ace WG,
I am presenting the draft-msahni-ace-cmpv2-coap-transport-01 to be adopted by
ACE WG. This document supplements the "Lightweight CMP Profile" draft
(
-snip-
I would appreciate further votes.
Hendrik
Von: Ace Im Auftrag von Panos Kampanakis (pkampana)
Gesendet: Montag, 5. Oktober 2020 17:44
An: Mohit Sahni ; Ace Wg
Cc: stripa...@paloaltonetworks.com; saurabh.tripa...@gmail.com; Mohit Sahni
; Brockhaus, Hendrik (T RDA CST S
Olaf
Thanks for supporting Mohit's draft.
> Von: Olaf Bergmann
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. Oktober 2020 10:16
>
> Hi Hendrik and all,
>
>
> I was a bit surprised that you have selected the ACE working group for this.
> One
> thing that might get in our way when doing this in ACE is the emerg
Panos, thank you for explaining you position. I understand that you support
EST. I already expressed my position and arguments in favor of CMP. :-)
As you see the authentication provided by binding the CSR to the TLS handshake
as a pro of EST, I see in many environments exactly this as a drawback
As the CMPoverCoAP draft was already discussed in LAMPS and Jim suggested to
consider it in ACE, I suggest to drop the Note and come back to a clear
statement as discussed at IETF109.
Discussion on the LAMPS Mailing List from June:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/uyYCf5sMcxg6xoQFcbe1
Thank you Daniel for the clarification.
Hendrik
Von: Daniel Migault
Gesendet: Montag, 7. Dezember 2020 19:11
An: Brockhaus, Hendrik (T RDA CST SEA-DE)
Cc: Benjamin Kaduk ; Ace Wg
Betreff: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion
Thanks, I was about just sending them a note, but that is maybe not needed
Hi Daniel
Thanks for kicking the ball.
I would appreciate the adoption of Mohits draft and I am also willing to review
it.
There are also implementation demonstrating CMP message transport on CoAP next
to HTTP.
https://github.com/siemens/embeddedCMP
https://github.com/siemens/LightweightCmpRa
A
Mohit
We introduced V3 of CMP in draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-updates-08 Section 2.15. The
version of CMP is not relevant to the CoAP transport, I guess. Therefore, I
suggest to remove references to the CMP version from your draft, especially
from the title. If you want to exclude CMP V1 as specified
Mohit
I read your draft again. Thank you for this contribution. I like that it is
very short.
Below there are some suggestions for an update of the document:
- Remove the indication of the CMP version (as stated in my previous email)
- As CMP Updates (draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-updates) is updating R
David, Mohit
> Von: David von Oheimb
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 11. März 2021 18:51
>
> To reduce the DoS risk in particular with the need to split larger messages
> into smaller chunks to re-assemble them later,
> it should be pretty helpful if both sides of the connection minimize the
> number
Hi Mohit
Thank you for the update and removing specific reference to CMPV2.
May be you can also remove 'V2' in the document tittle, heading line, and file
name with the next update as well.
Many Thanks,
Hendrik
> Von: Ace Im Auftrag von Mohit Sahni
> Gesendet: Freitag, 23. April 2021 07:54
>
Mohit, Daniel
My preference is to define the URI suffix in cmp-over-coap.
As the URI suffix is coap specific, it looks more logical to me to define it
there. In CMP Updates we define the http URI suffix as update to RFC 6712 and
not to RFC 4210. Finally CMP Updates only provides updates to RFC 4
s will have different Protocol part i.e.
> http:// or https:// for HTTP transport and coap:// or coaps:// for CoAP
> Transport, I think it makes sense to have just cmp for both instead of have
> different .well-known/ suffix for different transports.
>
> -Mohit
>
>
>
Hello Mohit
Many thanks for this update.
I especially like the addressing of delayed delivery of responses and the
registration for announcement messages.
Hendrik
Von: Ace Im Auftrag von Mohit Sahni
Gesendet: Freitag, 1. Oktober 2021 23:28
An: Ace Wg
Cc: i-d-annou...@ietf.org
Betreff: Re: [Ac
Von: Daniel Migault
Gesendet: Dienstag, 26. Oktober 2021 02:22
On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 5:18 PM Mohit Sahni
mailto:mohit06...@gmail.com>> wrote:
D) I will add a note for IANA mentioning this. Can you please review if this
note looks good?
This Internet draft references the .well-known/cmp
es .well-known/cmp registry permanent.
Yours,
Daniel
On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 2:15 AM Brockhaus, Hendrik
mailto:hendrik.brockh...@siemens.com>> wrote:
Von: Daniel Migault mailto:mglt.i...@gmail.com>>
Gesendet: Dienstag, 26. Oktober 2021 02:22
On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 5:18 PM Mohit Sahn
Ben
Thank you for your review and your comment on CMP Updates.
I will just comment on the usage of "cmp" well-known URI and leave the other
comments to the authors of draft-ietf-ace-cmpv2-coap-transport-04.
> Von: Ace Im Auftrag von Benjamin Kaduk
> Gesendet: Montag, 14. Februar 2022 20:22
>
>
gt;
> Hi Hendrik,
>
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 07:42:31AM +, Brockhaus, Hendrik wrote:
> > Ben
> >
> > Thank you for your review and your comment on CMP Updates.
> > I will just comment on the usage of "cmp" well-known URI and leave the
> oth
ibes above.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Hendrik
> Von: Benjamin Kaduk
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 17. Februar 2022 00:29
>
> Hi Hendrik,
>
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 07:42:31AM +, Brockhaus, Hendrik wrote:
> > Ben
> >
> > Tha
ument in ACE?
Hendrik
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Brockhaus, Hendrik (T CST SEA-DE)
Gesendet: Freitag, 15. April 2022 17:07
An: Mohit Sahni
Cc: ace@ietf.org;; Benjamin Kaduk ;
stripa...@paloaltonetworks.com
Betreff: AW: [Ace] AD review of draft-ietf-ace-cmpv2-coap-transport-04
Mohit
Thank you very much for performing all these updates.
Hendrik
> Von: Ace Im Auftrag von Mohit Sahni
>
> Hi Ben and Hello Paul,
> I have published a new version for the draft that incorporates Ben's
> Comments, I am sorry for the long delay that happened due to some
> personal reasons. I
Mohit, Daniel
In the meantime, the Lightweight CMP Profile passed the IESG review and is on
its way for publication.
Also, the BRSKI-AE draft is in the last review rounds.
Both drafts and also CMP Algorithms and CMP Updates require publication of
CMPoverCoAP.
What is the status of this draft and
If I am correct, the SecDir review is not complete.
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/vZJDmEsWxvhKcjGVOOTj8QnZ3ns/
Hendrik
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Daniel Migault
> Gesendet: Montag, 16. Januar 2023 14:02
> An: Brockhaus, Hendrik (T CST SEA-DE) ;
> Mo
Daniel
Thank you! That would be highly appreciated :-)
Hendrik
Von: Daniel Migault
Gesendet: Montag, 16. Januar 2023 15:46
An: Brockhaus, Hendrik (T CST SEA-DE)
Cc: Mohit Sahni ;
draft-ietf-ace-cmpv2-coap-transport@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org;
paul.wout...@aiven.io; Benjamin Kaduk ; Fries
Dear Mohit
Dear Saurabh
Thanks' a lot, for writing the document draft-ietf-ace-cmpv2-coap-transport. I
really appreciate your work and use it in my documents that update the
Certificate Management Protocol. In the meantime, all three documents
(draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-algorithms, draft-ietf-lamps-
The changes submitted with version -09 of the draft addressed my concerns.
Thanks to Paul for reporting them.
I have nothing to add regarding CMP well-known URIs.
I cannot do the review on the text regarding the CoAP Content-Formats registry
because I am no expert there.
Hendrik
> Von: David D
Mohit
Thank you for the update of the IANA Considerations section.
I spotted one additional minor issue in Section 2.6. To align the text with
Section 2.1 of the draft and with CMP Updates I propose the following change:
OLD
coap://www.example.com/.well-known/cmp/ann
coap://www.exa
Thanks to Mohit and Saurabh for the update also from my side.
Are there any further changes planned or is anything else necessary before
moving the draft to RFC Editor state?
Hendrik
> Von: Ace Im Auftrag von Daniel Migault
>
> Thanks for the submission Mohit.
>
> Yours,
> Daniel
>
> __
31 matches
Mail list logo
