I read the document before it was adopted (before SECDISPATCH), and I didn't
see any problems with it.
I have re-read it in the context of IoT or enterprise (routers) devices that
might contain long-lived IDevID (sometimes called Manufacturer Installed
Certificates, confusingly appreviated "MIC")
Sorry that this email is three weeks old.
I felt that it deserved a proper reply.
Eliot Lear wrote:
> The issue for me is library support. If libraries take the doc too
> seriously, it screws the apps that really need to do the right thing
> for their use cases.
I partly agree.
The
>In summary, I don't see anything in use-san that will affect BRSKI.
That is great to hear, thanks for the careful analysis.
>Some nits:
All look like good things to do, I'll make a PR soonish.
What do you think of just rewriting this to completely replace 6125, rather
than trying to b
Hi,
I think we’re past this, but just to be clear:
There are a VAST number of devices that run off of iDevIDs: they never
transition off of them. I’m not a fan, but that’s what they do.
Eliot
> On 14 May 2021, at 02:22, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Signed PGP part
>
> I read the document
