https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-moskowitz-drip-secure-nrid-c2/
now references diet-esp.
I am ready to add my efforts on the diet-esp document. I DO want it to
get a SCHC IP port number so SCHC can be the ESP Next Header value.
Also so IP itself can use SCHC for the diet-ESP if needed
I am reading diet-esp right now, and from what you said, will skip
minimal-esp at least for now, as I have too much else on my plate (as
you well know).
SCHC is explicitly called out in the Intro without referencing the
drafts of the time. To avoid any blocking drafts? Would you now have
87
minimal esp describes how to implement a standard ESP in a constrained
environment with minimal options as well as variants to minimize the impact
of the implementation on the device.
diet-esp defines how to compress / decompress ESP. The description is
pretty much complete. We implemented it on C
Daniel and Tero,
How do diet-esp and minimal-esp intersect?
minimal-esp is, it seems ready for publication, so nothing really
changing it is possible.
But what does diet-esp do instead?
Squeezing down esp and adding support for SCHC ('easy' by adding it as
an IP Protocol) is of interest to
No question IMHO. It would fit into other SCHC rules in use.
I will look at the draft; it has been a while. I have a real use case,
but I will see what, other than 8750 gains are available for this use case.
On 4/21/22 10:36, Daniel Migault wrote:
The question we are asking ourselves is shou
The question we are asking ourselves is should we re-write the spec with
SCHC.
Yours,
Daniel
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 9:58 AM Tero Kivinen wrote:
> Robert Moskowitz writes:
> > Yet in 8724, they define a in-band header:
> >
> >|--- Compressed Header ---|
> >
> >+-
Robert Moskowitz writes:
> Yet in 8724, they define a in-band header:
>
> |--- Compressed Header ---|
>
> +-++
>
> | RuleID | Compression Residue | Payload |
>
> +--
On 4/20/22 05:42, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
On 4/19/22 23:15, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 11:09:26PM -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
Has there been any discussion about Transport ESP and SCHC from lpwan?
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lpwan-architecture/
In Sec
On 4/19/22 23:15, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 11:09:26PM -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
Has there been any discussion about Transport ESP and SCHC from lpwan?
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lpwan-architecture/
In Sec 5, the assumption is the security envelope i
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 11:09:26PM -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> Has there been any discussion about Transport ESP and SCHC from lpwan?
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lpwan-architecture/
>
> In Sec 5, the assumption is the security envelope is above UDP. e.g.
> DTLS and QUIC.
10 matches
Mail list logo
