From nobody Sun Nov 1 16:41:31 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietf.org Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 411563A0B1D; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 16:41:26 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: ace@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.21.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ace@ietf.org Message-ID: <160427768622.5519.4259147245558046261@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2020 16:41:26 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Ace] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08.txt X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 00:41:26 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments WG of the IETF. Title : Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT)-TLS profile of Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments (ACE) Framework Authors : Cigdem Sengul Anthony Kirby Filename : draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08.txt Pages : 33 Date : 2020-11-01 Abstract: This document specifies a profile for the ACE (Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments) framework to enable authorization in a Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT)-based publish-subscribe messaging system. Proof-of-possession keys, bound to OAuth2.0 access tokens, are used to authenticate and authorize MQTT Clients. The protocol relies on TLS for confidentiality and MQTT server (broker) authentication. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Sun Nov 1 16:47:18 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 292A23A0B25 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 16:47:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yPDuOP6KgAnm for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 16:47:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F6433A0B22 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 16:47:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com with SMTP id z123so1860743vsb.0 for ; Sun, 01 Nov 2020 16:47:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=YdPBLiGBqxmY1GcaduvEknIaT0ADwBot/Pj6v6JKnBk=; b=Kv5Bn6IxVfa0HBt9aDEZbWoMI4cFWV0dViY10btVoavenyXHpQyUL8/tFXpLqxcvq6 Z/YWi9wF2adictkbKPkofz6qo08EEZ0qy6arl15DyWvw5uwLT8e+nsVG+X7z+GpwifNb QSc7mDJl9jHGLnaWb4B5UOFgd4WhQ+R+tURME62SmyV8B6l8ATWfRV7mWYfkMIDi6IWa 7MjSW+TDl2JWWqC7OzsETLAyTaBpNFxG3EtYv6lqMhKf08OQe4TbDqr4UA2nFq4rpn1D 7X4m0evs0hh4ildTAss2rimLT/+QGe53DJYJYQBuCykCMIK5XDXN1r13+a04Z6Kqqv5b J2jg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=YdPBLiGBqxmY1GcaduvEknIaT0ADwBot/Pj6v6JKnBk=; b=HvjhDJwDEINyqs5/8iM9XDK5wZQxO0UsLYhKP5HE7yt+BCzc3ujGZ1UOGch7lFoyH9 QsALOGXbAucSdStK5vXm+vy9M3tX2GOgp3yoZ5MyzneHIqbI70dswXGDkDwyso7WOb8u CoycUNWxmol2Izkc5FQy/BRVNaFSKHcGv1fq4RA6seeBkr697g2BqAm9JXsL2XLNQeEx MIJUGXQR0jUcEN9A5e5ArPsP2jHJuBvArP5dxhThVGm3S46RKWwc799LfH4z8LmkLljW 5cX9PBmIrPHbnNy7i/a2xQxcA/1/BiAdY1SIttpYsxhhQC6Pef9NIYgV9HlvY2ZBCP7O l51Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53280jhunyKc8IpXqNFE5B0+W8cTsXdqATQdrSt8kDN9c5DFjTxP iCP2qeVeHaxaMOH1oy8JKlM3P4VtahgH7qxnDLsCElRQ8x/Igg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxZD13dXhuuurA2OP3NLvAz8Wo9TmqegiGPYAr1GRIYmiv5WQx9vzs8iZelLc7Q7anOD9dqtUp6loc6Y2rISxM= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:1255:: with SMTP id p21mr12169586vsg.22.1604278033990; Sun, 01 Nov 2020 16:47:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <160427768622.5519.4259147245558046261@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <160427768622.5519.4259147245558046261@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Cigdem Sengul Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 00:47:03 +0000 Message-ID: To: Ace Wg Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000056466305b31516bd" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08.txt X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 00:47:17 -0000 --00000000000056466305b31516bd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hello Ace, This version addresses the WGLC reviews received on the mailing list. Thank you Daniel, Francesca and Marco for your extensive reviews and discussion on the mailing list. A summary of changes from Version 07 to 08: o Fixed several nits, typos based on WG reviews. o Added missing references. o Added the definition for Property defined by MQTT, and Client Authorisation Server. o Added artwork to show Authorisation Data format for various PoP- related message exchange. o Removed all MQTT-related must/should/may. o Made AS discovery optional. o Clarified what the client and server must implement for the client authentication; cleaned up TLS 1.3 related language. Kind regards, --Cigdem On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 12:42 AM wrote: > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Authentication and Authorization for > Constrained Environments WG of the IETF. > > Title : Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT)-TLS > profile of Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments > (ACE) Framework > Authors : Cigdem Sengul > Anthony Kirby > Filename : draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08.txt > Pages : 33 > Date : 2020-11-01 > > Abstract: > This document specifies a profile for the ACE (Authentication and > Authorization for Constrained Environments) framework to enable > authorization in a Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT)-based > publish-subscribe messaging system. Proof-of-possession keys, bound > to OAuth2.0 access tokens, are used to authenticate and authorize > MQTT Clients. The protocol relies on TLS for confidentiality and > MQTT server (broker) authentication. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile/ > > There are also htmlized versions available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Ace mailing list > Ace@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace > --00000000000056466305b31516bd Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Ace,=C2=A0
This version address= es the WGLC reviews received on the mailing list. Thank you Daniel, Frances= ca and Marco for your extensive reviews and discussion on the mailing list.= =C2=A0

A summary of changes from Version 07 to 08:=

=C2=A0 =C2=A0o =C2=A0Fixed several nits, typos based on WG reviews.=

=C2=A0 =C2=A0o =C2=A0Added missing references.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0= o =C2=A0Added the definition for Property defined by MQTT, and Client
= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Authorisation Server.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0o =C2=A0Adde= d artwork to show Authorisation Data format for various PoP-
=C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 related message exchange.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0o =C2=A0Removed al= l MQTT-related must/should/may.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0o =C2=A0Made AS discove= ry optional.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0o =C2=A0Clarified what the client and serv= er must implement for the client
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 authentication; cl= eaned up TLS 1.3 related language.

Kind regard= s,=C2=A0
--Cigdem=C2=A0

On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 12:42 AM <= internet-drafts@ietf.org>= ; wrote:

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies.
This draft is a work item of the Authentication and Authorization for Const= rained Environments WG of the IETF.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Title=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0:= Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT)-TLS profile of Authentication a= nd Authorization for Constrained Environments (ACE) Framework
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Authors=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0: Cigd= em Sengul
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Anthony Kirby
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Filename=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : draft-iet= f-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08.txt
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Pages=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0:= 33
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Date=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 := 2020-11-01

Abstract:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0This document specifies a profile for the ACE (Authentication = and
=C2=A0 =C2=A0Authorization for Constrained Environments) framework to enabl= e
=C2=A0 =C2=A0authorization in a Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT)-= based
=C2=A0 =C2=A0publish-subscribe messaging system.=C2=A0 Proof-of-possession = keys, bound
=C2=A0 =C2=A0to OAuth2.0 access tokens, are used to authenticate and author= ize
=C2=A0 =C2=A0MQTT Clients.=C2=A0 The protocol relies on TLS for confidentia= lity and
=C2=A0 =C2=A0MQTT server (broker) authentication.


The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/dr= aft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile/

There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf= -ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08
https://datatracker.ietf.org= /doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?u= rl2=3Ddraft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-08


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submissio= n
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/


_______________________________________________
Ace mailing list
Ace@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
--00000000000056466305b31516bd-- From nobody Mon Nov 2 06:09:47 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietf.org Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E30B3A0BDB; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 06:09:42 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: ace@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.21.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ace@ietf.org Message-ID: <160432618214.27474.4906871090419328822@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 06:09:42 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Ace] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-10.txt X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 14:09:42 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments WG of the IETF. Title : Key Provisioning for Group Communication using ACE Authors : Francesca Palombini Marco Tiloca Filename : draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-10.txt Pages : 66 Date : 2020-11-02 Abstract: This document defines message formats and procedures for requesting and distributing group keying material using the ACE framework, to protect communications between group members. Discussion Venues This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC. Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at https://github.com/ace-wg/ace-key-groupcomm. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm/ There is also an HTML version available at: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-10.html A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-10 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Mon Nov 2 06:20:00 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A1993A108F for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 06:19:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.101 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FfgxHFGt62Vs for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 06:19:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from EUR04-DB3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr60067.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.6.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 938FB3A10BD for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 06:19:48 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=LFyMKckZJdXtj9bQDQm1fOIFFNQdaGW6vWCQKhCM+ICSg8K4BeT7tKNPLiEJ8UKyl+8YhtR3X+M7j/HdKazJzA8jBl3ltvxU4bdU1wkcDIKMtsCkdFYMrUq7cmoAw1pE7xcxf2xw9+6lFCSDqjizKXB115zvKOx2F4TPA9npX4w8wVk5bIb0xuSH2QuSB+IfkwfWYZSpy3w7I0zXZOb6guxYHgzzIuCBIQnoZ+YbUE5YKOlCUP0Bqf2sFDx6e/yDlI+JQlknr7kFR0HuYC0E8Xr5ZjsjPUzn6iO84QqOXBQx9Z9zZBY8lJD071/9/+BWc5qfpGcCVP64d5Bg7kWMyA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=Je9Ga74pxMOhM8lvuwZCcIGyU/fH61BD/Ni9ZV1FxbE=; b=kZTx+Deo/SsJK/epcEu1OInvVUpYmAKDBM462vTgeLY81TpX5xlQg/12HWn5TJl63sjlaNU7rxDuaX5EwAz0bJgoaYMGf46LRnKXkXntp/kg8CtDuoUSGx+MQI+9+PJ4R9GXrVam+yHq/Dbh/seGhrBJjDxv0TkCspUDND5dcs/TRFYDuEOaS/COfx/fZs2WfXNrAuDTfMqfqqyJKEL4+OIBo7GBwuKv180LtPbOPKbjXEVWgOFgbzEZ1qU1mmI1XIzAPDkWnpY57EnHLJ2JEBFEU+cvrJUugPPpTOKqlO+553dmy1KiShmBbKh0aCnMKIRZU0CCCVMQ3YGOA9BpmA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=Je9Ga74pxMOhM8lvuwZCcIGyU/fH61BD/Ni9ZV1FxbE=; b=b7FPvhq3I19c3E2WBfHAxWbtU0zQNyI8xZmUTJ8s9FmXLeSPxQHvSL0tlwpXI2sChgrTC7r/psg9k2f/hZjKoFNjZRA4Jszu4UzqZ/aOftOLqm77dkm1X0oEtGXhlL3Nj3ReNEuP0s5zgzkQ/sffFvHD4KtsrXLWHh8+QmfMUFY= Received: from VI1PR07MB4477.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:803:74::33) by VI1PR0702MB3551.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:803:4::19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3541.10; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 14:19:45 +0000 Received: from VI1PR07MB4477.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d9ad:72f6:f14b:40ef]) by VI1PR07MB4477.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d9ad:72f6:f14b:40ef%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3541.011; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 14:19:45 +0000 From: Francesca Palombini To: Daniel Migault , Ace Wg Thread-Topic: [Ace] Call for agenda item for IETF 109 Thread-Index: AQHWoX6dNzf5lCNayE+Nkbm7VtAJeqm1FDIA Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 14:19:45 +0000 Message-ID: <3E950DF4-3E7B-4E23-A684-9036EA1471F4@ericsson.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-GB X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.42.20101102 authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com; x-originating-ip: [158.174.219.143] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: cf6f6eed-b4a1-4bc2-c130-08d87f3a596f x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: VI1PR0702MB3551: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8273; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: CqKINrXQAqOioGnstRpaVC9foWqLa6+kx/GMJ8UI0beOW8XpOjH4dy4He8WQAaQMeIwhwrvpb0EVMkVE5A1RwiinQlLTRihdZLdMKDxyQeUc/fiDOZAhO1lr8AS59V+i23p5WukquJ/R703W4oaEba7dpwIZ91/oH6d28+41QdDKrtRG5d2WSLumoYbSkgwiIUJXK5Rwp7W6s86kt4Vvam8mU03rMaXLrEyXnJKeIZmWA8vxZCMzVPPxGb0aPxX/TP2+jZqvLXRj25zROiMw79B9199YXDObF8kDCatVj/9gyLdSP1rEV4/BNsb/PC4ySwoDP+zTGLh0c1YpNLMaiQ== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:VI1PR07MB4477.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(136003)(396003)(366004)(39860400002)(376002)(346002)(186003)(6486002)(36756003)(44832011)(71200400001)(6512007)(64756008)(66476007)(2906002)(66446008)(66556008)(66946007)(2616005)(5660300002)(9326002)(8936002)(33656002)(316002)(86362001)(26005)(4744005)(76116006)(478600001)(53546011)(6506007)(83380400001)(110136005)(8676002)(91956017); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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 x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_3E950DF43E7B4E23A6849036EA1471F4ericssoncom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: VI1PR07MB4477.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: cf6f6eed-b4a1-4bc2-c130-08d87f3a596f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 02 Nov 2020 14:19:45.6323 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: nMYqetX8MXgKtAX8Aivo3HkKLs5F97h5XMpgVyT40EHEaDKlfRAu6pyVai0Os9cWBHf+kHoGB2ynOXY3FEUZ3o1qySxrFqlbOjiK8hVQ3ecCye05118Rd6K4xwrm4TG0 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VI1PR0702MB3551 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Call for agenda item for IETF 109 X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 14:19:58 -0000 --_000_3E950DF43E7B4E23A6849036EA1471F4ericssoncom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGkgRGFuaWVsLA0KDQpXZeKAmWQgbGlrZSB0byByZXF1ZXN0IDE1IG1pbnV0ZXMgdG8gZGlzY3Vz cyB1cGRhdGVzIG9uIGFjZS1rZXktZ3JvdXBjb21tIGF0IElFVEYxMDkuDQoNClRoYW5rcywNCkZy YW5jZXNjYQ0KDQpGcm9tOiBBY2UgPGFjZS1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnPiBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2Yg RGFuaWVsIE1pZ2F1bHQgPG1nbHQuaWV0ZkBnbWFpbC5jb20+DQpEYXRlOiBUdWVzZGF5LCAxMyBP Y3RvYmVyIDIwMjAgYXQgMTg6MzMNClRvOiBBY2UgV2cgPGFjZUBpZXRmLm9yZz4NClN1YmplY3Q6 IFtBY2VdIENhbGwgZm9yIGFnZW5kYSBpdGVtIGZvciBJRVRGIDEwOQ0KDQpIaSwNCg0KVGhlIEFj ZSBXRyB3aWxsIG1lZXQgZHVyaW5nIElFVEYgMTA5LiBJZiB5b3UgYXJlIHdpbGxpbmcgdG8gcHJl c2VudCwgcGxlYXNlIGxldCBtZSBrbm93IGJ5IHRoZSBlbmQgb2YgdGhlIG1vbnRoIHdoYXQgeW91 IGFyZSB3aWxsaW5nIHRvIHByZXNlbnQgYW5kIHRoZSBuZWNlc3NhcnkgdGltZSB5b3UgbmVlZC4N Cg0KWW91cnMsDQpEYW5pZWwNCg0KLS0NCkRhbmllbCBNaWdhdWx0DQpFcmljc3Nvbg0K --_000_3E950DF43E7B4E23A6849036EA1471F4ericssoncom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6bz0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6b2ZmaWNlIiB4 bWxuczp3PSJ1cm46c2NoZW1hcy1taWNyb3NvZnQtY29tOm9mZmljZTp3b3JkIiB4bWxuczptPSJo dHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNyb3NvZnQuY29tL29mZmljZS8yMDA0LzEyL29tbWwiIHhtbG5zPSJo dHRwOi8vd3d3LnczLm9yZy9UUi9SRUMtaHRtbDQwIj4NCjxoZWFkPg0KPG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVp dj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBjb250ZW50PSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJzZXQ9dXRmLTgiPg0KPG1l dGEgbmFtZT0iR2VuZXJhdG9yIiBjb250ZW50PSJNaWNyb3NvZnQgV29yZCAxNSAoZmlsdGVyZWQg bWVkaXVtKSI+DQo8c3R5bGU+PCEtLQ0KLyogRm9udCBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KQGZvbnQtZmFj ZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FtYnJpYSBNYXRoIjsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDQgNSAzIDUgNCA2 IDMgMiA0O30NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToy IDE1IDUgMiAyIDIgNCAzIDIgNDt9DQovKiBTdHlsZSBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KcC5Nc29Ob3Jt YWwsIGxpLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgZGl2Lk1zb05vcm1hbA0KCXttYXJnaW46MGNtOw0KCWZvbnQtc2l6 ZToxMS4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7fQ0Kc3Bhbi5FbWFp bFN0eWxlMTgNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6cGVyc29uYWwtcmVwbHk7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 IkNhbGlicmkiLHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7DQoJY29sb3I6d2luZG93dGV4dDt9DQouTXNvQ2hwRGVmYXVs dA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtdHlwZTpleHBvcnQtb25seTsNCglmb250LXNpemU6MTAuMHB0O30NCkBw YWdlIFdvcmRTZWN0aW9uMQ0KCXtzaXplOjYxMi4wcHQgNzkyLjBwdDsNCgltYXJnaW46NzIuMHB0 IDcyLjBwdCA3Mi4wcHQgNzIuMHB0O30NCmRpdi5Xb3JkU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7cGFnZTpXb3JkU2Vj dGlvbjE7fQ0KLS0+PC9zdHlsZT4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IGxhbmc9IkVOLUdCIiBsaW5rPSIj MDU2M0MxIiB2bGluaz0iIzk1NEY3MiIgc3R5bGU9IndvcmQtd3JhcDpicmVhay13b3JkIj4NCjxk aXYgY2xhc3M9IldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMSI+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHls ZT0ibXNvLWZhcmVhc3QtbGFuZ3VhZ2U6RU4tVVMiPkhpIERhbmllbCw8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bh bj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLWZhcmVhc3QtbGFu Z3VhZ2U6RU4tVVMiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29O b3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJtc28tZmFyZWFzdC1sYW5ndWFnZTpFTi1VUyI+V2XigJlkIGxp a2UgdG8gcmVxdWVzdCAxNSBtaW51dGVzIHRvIGRpc2N1c3MgdXBkYXRlcyBvbiBhY2Uta2V5LWdy b3VwY29tbSBhdCBJRVRGMTA5LjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29O b3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJtc28tZmFyZWFzdC1sYW5ndWFnZTpFTi1VUyI+PG86cD4mbmJz cDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9Im1z by1mYXJlYXN0LWxhbmd1YWdlOkVOLVVTIj5UaGFua3MsPGJyPg0KRnJhbmNlc2NhPG86cD48L286 cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9Im1zby1mYXJl YXN0LWxhbmd1YWdlOkVOLVVTIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8ZGl2IHN0 eWxlPSJib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXItdG9wOnNvbGlkICNCNUM0REYgMS4wcHQ7cGFkZGluZzoz LjBwdCAwY20gMGNtIDBjbSI+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibWFyZ2luLWxl ZnQ6MzYuMHB0Ij48Yj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEyLjBwdDtjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+ RnJvbToNCjwvc3Bhbj48L2I+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMi4wcHQ7Y29sb3I6Ymxh Y2siPkFjZSAmbHQ7YWNlLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmcmZ3Q7IG9uIGJlaGFsZiBvZiBEYW5pZWwg TWlnYXVsdCAmbHQ7bWdsdC5pZXRmQGdtYWlsLmNvbSZndDs8YnI+DQo8Yj5EYXRlOiA8L2I+VHVl c2RheSwgMTMgT2N0b2JlciAyMDIwIGF0IDE4OjMzPGJyPg0KPGI+VG86IDwvYj5BY2UgV2cgJmx0 O2FjZUBpZXRmLm9yZyZndDs8YnI+DQo8Yj5TdWJqZWN0OiA8L2I+W0FjZV0gQ2FsbCBmb3IgYWdl bmRhIGl0ZW0gZm9yIElFVEYgMTA5PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2 Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjM2LjBwdCI+PG86cD4m bmJzcDs8L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHls ZT0ibWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6MzYuMHB0Ij5IaSwmbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8 cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6MzYuMHB0Ij48bzpwPiZuYnNw OzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJt YXJnaW4tbGVmdDozNi4wcHQiPlRoZSBBY2UgV0cgd2lsbCBtZWV0IGR1cmluZyBJRVRGIDEwOS4g SWYgeW91IGFyZSB3aWxsaW5nIHRvIHByZXNlbnQsIHBsZWFzZSBsZXQgbWUga25vdyBieSB0aGUg ZW5kIG9mIHRoZSBtb250aCB3aGF0IHlvdSBhcmUgd2lsbGluZyB0byBwcmVzZW50IGFuZCB0aGUg bmVjZXNzYXJ5IHRpbWUgeW91IG5lZWQuJm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7PGJyIGNsZWFyPSJhbGwiPg0KPG86 cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi1s ZWZ0OjM2LjBwdCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFz cz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6MzYuMHB0Ij5Zb3VycywmbmJzcDs8YnI+ DQpEYW5pZWw8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3Jt YWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtYXJnaW4tbGVmdDozNi4wcHQiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6MzYuMHB0Ij4tLSA8 bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwi IHN0eWxlPSJtYXJnaW4tbGVmdDozNi4wcHQiPkRhbmllbCBNaWdhdWx0PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+ DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0ibWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6 MzYuMHB0Ij5Fcmljc3NvbjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0K PC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9ib2R5Pg0KPC9odG1sPg0K --_000_3E950DF43E7B4E23A6849036EA1471F4ericssoncom_-- From nobody Mon Nov 2 09:22:01 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietf.org Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D4DC3A0D2E; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 09:21:59 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: ace@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.21.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ace@ietf.org Message-ID: <160433771908.20670.13083563985713255455@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 09:21:59 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Ace] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-oscore-09.txt X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 17:21:59 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments WG of the IETF. Title : Key Management for OSCORE Groups in ACE Authors : Marco Tiloca Jiye Park Francesca Palombini Filename : draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-oscore-09.txt Pages : 61 Date : 2020-11-02 Abstract: This specification defines an application profile of the ACE framework for Authentication and Authorization, to request and provision keying material in group communication scenarios that are based on CoAP and secured with Group Object Security for Constrained RESTful Environments (OSCORE). This application profile delegates the authentication and authorization of Clients that join an OSCORE group through a Resource Server acting as Group Manager for that group. This application profile leverages protocol-specific transport profiles of ACE to achieve communication security, server authentication and proof-of-possession for a key owned by the Client and bound to an OAuth 2.0 Access Token. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-oscore/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-oscore-09 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-oscore-09 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm-oscore-09 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Mon Nov 2 09:29:57 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietf.org Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9F0F3A0D5A; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 09:29:44 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: ace@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.21.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ace@ietf.org Message-ID: <160433818472.13290.9864004633094156866@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 09:29:44 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Ace] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ace-oscore-gm-admin-01.txt X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 17:29:52 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments WG of the IETF. Title : Admin Interface for the OSCORE Group Manager Authors : Marco Tiloca Rikard Hoeglund Peter van der Stok Francesca Palombini Klaus Hartke Filename : draft-ietf-ace-oscore-gm-admin-01.txt Pages : 36 Date : 2020-11-02 Abstract: Group communication for CoAP can be secured using Group Object Security for Constrained RESTful Environments (Group OSCORE). A Group Manager is responsible to handle the joining of new group members, as well as to manage and distribute the group key material. This document defines a RESTful admin interface at the Group Manager, that allows an Administrator entity to create and delete OSCORE groups, as well as to retrieve and update their configuration. The ACE framework for Authentication and Authorization is used to enforce authentication and authorization of the Administrator at the Group Manager. Protocol-specific transport profiles of ACE are used to achieve communication security, proof-of-possession and server authentication. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-gm-admin/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-gm-admin-01 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-gm-admin-01 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ace-oscore-gm-admin-01 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Tue Nov 3 02:05:52 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1DB13A15C2 for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 02:05:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.101 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id e7VicFo0vh8M for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 02:05:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from EUR05-DB8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-db8eur05on2070.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.20.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D6B83A15BC for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 02:05:47 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=ZJ8J5qQA9+rCuSG0h3L+c36PsCa0Wu/plO3TqnTZ04feII+BQiY5TCOLoMi3DO0MMybsBZgj4tHDn9z/8PZ6tNAFrmACSn6jBVBSNJweYMSYxXMz2cAld4pH21Sh5yHpy/oB/FtTJaemXwvO11uXovtymxzkmEtM9tx8tr4IAMA3zxJ5WzB9KvCSLw24JDoZo2soWbk0NsBoNUX4cdpal4Sdl7UrjpOM/Nc65OXfipW8di2i30N1sIgB0/KAMSNMreaos4LKp6pPv4MrfRIx7cGyAhr9ahSZxK6gknOl29W0ZlOPLrLPSrlISd5o2Rs5HfW6EnqlNqyl8P2mgBPaYw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=pwQDC58Vu37OT2AOLCs0vVuhqFANX4C2HBISH+uQep4=; b=JyUMziqKrzExnf43Sl88mSK0Lu2UDkTjN44YmodviPD7blWuKGJNxniTPJAhX/Srt70QBtv6EU+nexEg0AMxCqRs+riPeGLwFkDOxN1/tO2ZOMEgWohA9+3XYLIrPhvM8YLVXfocHj/hegO4b4BbiDj/jDOkAxcgrezfeoXMoM64FZYBwsjuEIUu7raBCr2jFtOjw5Je9q4nVQFBOd9rftxEK7/RtW7kGyeYbx2QgHiwU7enQlc9Ltko84jie55DwZjzI7qRE4SI6w8mK+W2DPupMFs2QQriMm76GhtBsQRDUOUUlx4IORfBNWDTJP8gmF0oD9Ix9w9syhYS+6DYKg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=pwQDC58Vu37OT2AOLCs0vVuhqFANX4C2HBISH+uQep4=; b=HmCoQalqlP5bll3LhzfsczuwoyT/XG1SdjW0Z/umTI6aYhpWZChmiXB3A2VrozAIrmsjWPt3QPnNQvCs92CgjUHvlZkVsjJVvtpFptfrN56eDEhp8bAY4+xyoyEkffd+sj4Xq4LqC8Q18iAvOj1Ppp+ndlxRhmQJIedrEZnh0AQ= Received: from HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:82::14) by HE1PR0702MB3580.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:8c::15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3541.13; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 10:05:44 +0000 Received: from HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c99c:9978:10bb:e231]) by HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c99c:9978:10bb:e231%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3541.015; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 10:05:44 +0000 From: =?Windows-1252?Q?G=F6ran_Selander?= To: Daniel Migault , Ace Wg Thread-Topic: [Ace] Charter discussion Thread-Index: AQHWoxucbAjxceIga0igx21acPgYqam2JmJS Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 10:05:44 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com; x-originating-ip: [83.251.145.232] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: d1d71eee-8ff6-473c-cfd6-08d87fe00758 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HE1PR0702MB3580: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: H2Km/Ip1Hjj9K8XlRXeMx+fRCHskSaEKRoz6eZ/mFw1DCEbhs/Pof/N5cc6hqqo+km7H9JGDKKd8lUw129JEnjz07BI/0eD6Kgx5PQmF3uOwxlBQtlOkHySBE92M2xvWDrRifUBBbawf0Oz/XGlvr9IEfs/bEbJCgmBAhByHqdbu8UPjhSHAAWE94r7TnEXcNrIN/ssw/93E2+ircV2GqYDX2b7w/ZsVbNZMa/pZImhC4YgI158WVB6Bf3qBOGT9mPMJl1LE7kC7heOec6oQK8k6DhpUwvx6/bDbMTMWkZXt/byjDVCKAANhIzKgMJ3UN+k188Xgy4CGM3rKeMudopcstrpbRTAOb7F/vuB0R1sx5r/+2FgHWho2ISyyb93VnwZGUvKjArpWWojY27wDGAeNlEA68NIvCjThjLwGfsvmfdULaTHMvPFLEaYDv1X8uLLyQ9WKrF2Apva7ZWTCbQ== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(39860400002)(396003)(366004)(136003)(376002)(346002)(5660300002)(66476007)(64756008)(66446008)(52536014)(66946007)(76116006)(2906002)(71200400001)(8936002)(9686003)(316002)(55016002)(66556008)(110136005)(7696005)(86362001)(66574015)(166002)(53546011)(4001150100001)(186003)(83380400001)(6506007)(33656002)(8676002)(478600001)(26005)(966005)(15940465004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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 x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_HE1PR0702MB3674F5E7C6044443418E8B1BF4110HE1PR0702MB3674_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: d1d71eee-8ff6-473c-cfd6-08d87fe00758 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 03 Nov 2020 10:05:44.3788 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: qqROiyAEGiWasMsrx42kxijwlIjP+mbtElrMvhfE0iXbNJ2QSJtP43r6F0+gTdnE7X/dBbg8PbLTsxlhTOOgp4xhxAVSTKqzHEHlNcUn2t8= X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR0702MB3580 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 10:05:50 -0000 --_000_HE1PR0702MB3674F5E7C6044443418E8B1BF4110HE1PR0702MB3674_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Daniel, and all, Some comments on the proposed charter and your mail, sorry for late respons= e. 1. =94The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and exist= ing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of the fra= mework for additional secure communications protocols=94 I take it this text covers (should the WG want to adopt): * draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile * an ACE-EDHOC profile (i.e. the POST /token response and the access to= ken provision information to support authentication with EDHOC, e.g. raw pu= blic key of the other party). Such a profile could provide good trust manag= ement properties, potentially at the cost of a larger access token etc. Right? 2. =94In particular the discussion might revive a discussion that happened in = 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired wor= k such as [3]. Please make this discussion constructive on this thread.=94 As I remember it, the outcome of this discussion was =96 in line with the m= indset of EST =96 that it is beneficial to re-use authentication and commun= ication security appropriate for actual use case. If coaps is suitable for = a particular use case, then it makes sense to protect also the enrolment pr= ocedure with this protocol. But whereas the security protocol is coaps inst= ead of https, the enrolment functionality and semantics should reuse that o= f EST, possibly profiled for the new setting: [4]. In the same spirit there was support at the meeting [2] to specify protecti= on of EST payloads profiled for use with OSCORE as communication security p= rotocol, together with a suitable AKE for authentication. Following the ado= ption of EDHOC in LAKE this work has now been revived [5]. IMHO the reasoni= ng above still makes sense. With this in mind, and taking into account recent discussion on the list, p= erhaps this part of the charter: =94The Working Group will standardize how to use Constrained Application Pr= otocol (CoAP) as a Transport Medium for the Certificate management protocol= version 2 (CMPv2). =94 should be rephrased or complemented with the reasoning above, for example: The scope of the Working Group includes profiles of the Enrolment over Secu= re Transport (EST) transported with the Constrained Application Protocol (C= oAP)=94 Thanks G=F6ran [4] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-coap-est [5] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" wrote: Hi, I would like to start the charter discussion. Here is a draft of a proposed= charter [1]. It seems to be that additional discussion is needed with regard to the last= paragraph related certificate management. In particular the discussion mig= ht revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair = of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please make this dis= cussion constructive on this thread. The fundamental question is whether we need certificate management at this = stage. If the answer is yes, and we have multiple proposals, it would be go= od to clarify the position of the different proposals and evaluate whether = a selection is needed or not before validating the charter. Please provide your inputs on the mailing list before October 30. Of course= for minor edits, you may suggest them directly on the google doc. Yours, Daniel [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnB= XhoDiptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-interim-2017-ace-03-2017101913= 00/ [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-selander-ace-eals/ -- Daniel Migault Ericsson --_000_HE1PR0702MB3674F5E7C6044443418E8B1BF4110HE1PR0702MB3674_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Daniel, and all,

 

Some comments on the proposed charter and your mail, sorry for late r= esponse.  

 

1.

=94The Working= Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of the framew= ork for additional secure communications protocols=94

&nbs= p;

I take it this text covers (should the WG want to adopt):<= /span>

 

  • draft-tiloca-ace-group-osc= ore-profile
  • an ACE-EDHOC profile (i.e. the POST /token response and the ac= cess token provision information to support authentication with EDHOC, e.g. raw public key of the other party). Such a profile could provi= de good trust management properties, potentially at the cost of a larger ac= cess token etc.

 

Right?

 

2.

=94In particular the dis= cussion might revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was no= t co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please ma= ke this discussion constructive on this thread.=94

 

As I remember it, the outcome of this discussion was =96 in line with= the mindset of EST =96 that it is beneficial to re-use authentication and = communication security appropriate for actual use case. If coaps is suitable for a particular use case, then it makes se= nse to protect also the enrolment procedure with this protocol. But whereas= the security protocol is coaps instead of https, the enrolment functionali= ty and semantics should reuse that of EST, possibly profiled for the new setting: [4].

 

In the same spirit there was support at the meeting [2] to specify pr= otection of EST payloads profiled for use with OSCORE as communication secu= rity protocol, together with a suitable AKE for authentication. Following the adoption of EDHOC in LAKE this work = has now been revived [5]. IMHO the reasoning above still makes sense.<= /o:p>

 

With this in mind, and taking into account recent discussion on the l= ist, perhaps this part of the charter:

 

=94The Workin= g Group will standardize how to use Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) as a Transport Medium for the Certificate management protocol versi= on 2 (CMPv2).   =94

 

should be rephrased or complemented with the reasoning above, for exa= mple:

 

The scope of the Working Group includes profiles of the Enrolment over Secur= e Transport (EST) transported with the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)=94

 

Thanks

G=F6ran

&nbs= p;

[4] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-coap-est=

[5] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore

&nbs= p;

&nbs= p;

&nbs= p;

&nbs= p;

On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" <ace-bounces@ietf.org> wrote:

Hi,

I would like to start t= he charter discussion. Here is a draft of a proposed charter [1].

 

It seems to be that add= itional discussion is needed with regard to the last paragraph related cert= ificate management. In particular the discussion might revive a discussion = that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please= make this discussion constructive on this thread.

 

The fundamental questio= n is whether we need certificate management at this stage. If the answer is= yes, and we have multiple proposals, it would be good to clarify the posit= ion of the different proposals and evaluate whether a selection is needed or not before validating the charter. <= /o:p>

 

Please provide your inp= uts on the mailing list before October 30. Of course for minor edits, you m= ay suggest them directly on the google doc.

 

Yours,

Daniel

 

 

--

Daniel Migault

 

Ericsson

--_000_HE1PR0702MB3674F5E7C6044443418E8B1BF4110HE1PR0702MB3674_-- From nobody Tue Nov 3 06:00:16 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BB3F3A0ACD for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 06:00:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.101 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lOrNPtsUhzRS for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 06:00:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from EUR02-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr20073.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.2.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8691D3A0AB6 for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 06:00:13 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=JNyjquwDHP0CYr4qUtH55DdlslMlXXUy+aUZVYXPalAaMA1N9Gh0QkEIt1IcKweQgNOjZyK7h95Hlh5+97m9MpnhKuaZU/PM1Zmqef0tZ9MkNJvkJkQ3z5UBsPcY+/0ZZfeETQrpBKqhas/Q/uwg84P9jNv1bkWj+FlSJ5y2Uv8pWwyThNJr/7qLBLTL6QFwH1cc2ZpR5zQXYuRNrrCMHh7zcsgdh3VdDDdzmCkMeglhtsxIjAiSgd8apZxh9W2aLsRB7dUEjnTP8M/TpiZVRKYOP67o4NehvPwYBBbSm3Z3EuV6SF+7dOJc59V+novkyZ7uu0c3w7ZTYQdLQ4ND3w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=mgyxOGLj+Dah0oYR+dlUKkoJMr2zFZs/QIO3qq9Qagg=; b=YXq1fmoxX0NU3m0jgLxlFkgIUtfDnCTGuEVw0NWmTbIhDs/GBc4/0T7nvlAHqApwaMHt9uYYc5n/KkxuIFMzAq3qJ5u72TAntwuG0iqf1WvrUlG9tLekONbyCV0LW6E+SUHDf5L/BduPvQJwCFN07sykp6rGKo+K0wz1uxte5CHkU6/3CCdFkQFoABVti1DwQuQCT83ZZi4PLUSAP1asy0AzJvbY1LXtbSaztuyVzxa/cudDsZ1GB3xdaEMiUkMq14Bbh5z6LDKxF2ZdS/Bbp2hOYG1IGFcXRy23QIpLbmThyQnvsXv4NfG5QC3ewhg8uZ+okZmLpvLFxKRoFFsZvQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=mgyxOGLj+Dah0oYR+dlUKkoJMr2zFZs/QIO3qq9Qagg=; b=TCU1IUKUAq1AVUci4GFAP9vaCzKStkWt5BhqxE2IpvoGWj+h+gL9JGSnUBgKx9rRHNirjxmYk/Iv+MpTtvAecl+jAZ58Gldi2+UPmgkNHEKg5WAU5lZAtkUIa5JXRW8ChwsFl1qpCfZKNwm+T0iEl1ziUljeuQGo9Lj8Wc6CmJU= Received: from HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:82::14) by HE1PR07MB3068.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:32::26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3541.10; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 14:00:06 +0000 Received: from HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c99c:9978:10bb:e231]) by HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c99c:9978:10bb:e231%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3541.015; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 14:00:06 +0000 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Selander?= To: Daniel Migault , Ace Wg Thread-Topic: [Ace] Call for agenda item for IETF 109 Thread-Index: AQHWoX6dhycDpvD1RkiWoMOYMGdYUqm2i9xc Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 14:00:06 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com; x-originating-ip: [83.251.145.232] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 43f7fde3-c14c-4ade-3085-08d88000c4d8 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HE1PR07MB3068: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: gZ6vrzY0HxLO/g+Ln/phB+NE8WOqCak61+zytIk9HStolwlbekkKzHh65niaERCVe7jKllFXB1/WsPkkDfMp1dnZnJoLueiDOJpNxcPtqJzRnpaCiRD11TXWEG+UYdcW/zeE6gpyjYvyRP9bwOhtwfGa1ujsEyenDN3AfEmxS3VgWnVhzOs3/WUYxfgw248PeoPI1vtXk9EKc3pofKBXEhyknuEovIGwjA+PWhbn/Pu3CD1Qcs2W2101Qg5M6WlraV5i+8VzzuxcZIu7ny3H1ZVphBjmS6i1g8oRzSLyLkk52gJXTqti/QCvO6MNaZZe x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(39860400002)(346002)(136003)(396003)(366004)(376002)(2906002)(53546011)(71200400001)(5660300002)(33656002)(110136005)(76116006)(186003)(316002)(8936002)(52536014)(4744005)(9686003)(66946007)(66446008)(26005)(6506007)(86362001)(66556008)(66476007)(4001150100001)(64756008)(478600001)(55016002)(7696005)(8676002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: PZ8b/TXW9J/YVQeANtXIksbvyU+ZKMxnLOTrq5Z3IqpSQ2xi1332EQoN/MIBLAG79VS0ScMND2hOMbQzYxDgthFE/Bxo5KAXyRhbbMahM2wIM+pE5OvTDTqs+cVHc/R3mdWEVpIsmeChjyVd8iz8Q6+pW/TQhDOKKmVXR/kBTe4+zQH+lTPST3ZuQIK0LXS9GTmFnGiOLu/6B2RzzI1hKv/eMtdboN/3e2w6I2RIZZ3DfyNqgjtPVuQJmQ1JEUv2rZUxfpSRng+XLOEaJIW5uVs2xtLv1NBc2cW13VITNtGbUMaQXWKrWeeM7Jkz9EHJDEI/CqvlIun+8YPJkytn0KhlnrfnnPAvYFYTVivBYp8ULngl6+7vGTY4TNTYPD7IvHY2Dkq0HJGegI57TzGloCCar6EJHqQ971aiYCN5FuKsnv/qW/jP++5Br8kQVrXOMg7Vv8aOAlwfzh9gpATaxprMz1LA5ONjFtzcEr3mx5QmExlmbt6dx0d5yp/2RgM+GDHaI6cfjNM4UG33lvi09uYdLBihaC4jhLA6dsigA59tQHOCCCMMfAZSDrzsS846Rg5RLmFfsdWW7Z33JYYhI9MLJWBi9Jt4AhxFodCI7w6eeSUHwOZpj43JTMt2zHicU5FMe8iqwZD7OmGguXsaTA== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_HE1PR0702MB36740AF6B38A342F3B8E1CFCF4110HE1PR0702MB3674_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 43f7fde3-c14c-4ade-3085-08d88000c4d8 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 03 Nov 2020 14:00:06.2503 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: pUO6cCB5veCNY0LVCEX6m7yWTBJMPFgsCoM0z5MVQBEflB51fnB2Es5sbxblw5VK3Hf91WMHuyYm2pl+4IPk4XhHxJPiBuUacbnqkMlrf3E= X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR07MB3068 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Call for agenda item for IETF 109 X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 14:00:15 -0000 --_000_HE1PR0702MB36740AF6B38A342F3B8E1CFCF4110HE1PR0702MB3674_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Daniel, If there is time we would like to discuss two drafts which are independent = but can be combined: * draft-selander-ace-ake-authz (this was discussed on the ACE list in S= eptember) * draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore (motivated in a recent mail about = the new charter) G=F6ran On 2020-10-13, 18:33, "Ace" wrote: Hi, The Ace WG will meet during IETF 109. If you are willing to present, please= let me know by the end of the month what you are willing to present and th= e necessary time you need. Yours, Daniel -- Daniel Migault Ericsson --_000_HE1PR0702MB36740AF6B38A342F3B8E1CFCF4110HE1PR0702MB3674_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Daniel,

 

If there is time we would like to discuss two drafts which are indepe= ndent but can be combined:

 

  • draft-selan= der-ace-ake-authz (this was discussed on the ACE list in September)
  • draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore (motivated in a recent mail about th= e new charter)

 

G=F6ran

 

&nbs= p;

On 2020-10-13, 18:33, "Ace" <ace-bounces@ietf.org> wrote:

Hi,

The Ace WG will meet du= ring IETF 109. If you are willing to present, please let me know by the end= of the month what you are willing to present and the necessary time you ne= ed.  

 

Yours,

Daniel

 

--

Daniel Migault

 

Ericsson

--_000_HE1PR0702MB36740AF6B38A342F3B8E1CFCF4110HE1PR0702MB3674_-- From nobody Tue Nov 3 10:44:55 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88C493A0D7C for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 10:44:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yI4IJy1U2q1I for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 10:44:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBE543A0D3C for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 10:44:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ABDA389BC; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 13:44:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id Fe7t4eXhaac0; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 13:44:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98BD9389C3; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 13:43:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 422271662; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 12:28:03 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Richardson To: Ace Wg cc: Daniel Migault In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 18:44:54 -0000 <#secure method=3Dpgpmime mode=3Dsign> G=C3=B6ran Selander wrote: > In the same spirit there was support at the meeting [2] to specify > protection of EST payloads profiled for use with OSCORE as > communication security protocol, together with a suitable AKE for > authentication. Following the adoption of EDHOC in LAKE this work has > now been revived [5]. IMHO the reasoning above still makes sense. > With this in mind, and taking into account recent discussion on the > list, perhaps this part of the charter: > =E2=80=9DThe Working Group will standardize how to use Constrained Ap= plication > Protocol (CoAP) as a Transport Medium for the Certificate management > protocol version 2 (CMPv2). =E2=80=9D Note that CMPv2 is being revised in LAMPS, and that the ANIMA brski-async-enroll is specifying CMPv2 as an alternative for EST in an onboarding flow. I further expect to propose text to brski-async-enroll to do CMPv2 via CoAP multicast + CORECONF. I'd rather do this work in the proposed IOTOPS WG, but I don't really understand how that is working out yet. As such, there is no need to find another place for to do CMPv2/over CoAP. > should be rephrased or complemented with the reasoning above, for exa= mple: > The scope of the Working Group includes profiles of the Enrolment ove= r Secure Transport (EST) transported with the Constrained Application Proto= col (CoAP)=E2=80=9D Is this a re-interpretation of the charter, or a proposed charter change? -- Michael Richardson . o O ( IPv6 I=C3=B8T consulti= ng ) Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide From nobody Tue Nov 3 10:58:55 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4A003A1105 for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 10:58:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.101 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KtO1xcVE81jd for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 10:58:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from EUR04-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr70077.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.7.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E06E23A0639 for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 10:58:48 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=CQH1QOIwhpOsvG6aVg6uE1RBBQl3ZXceQcYGRwAuddFyx2FhGbyAipp6IPID6pyjQkGj2MMi6ChpZHLqflDnDc43b9O/2LSlxPqhwpa1cJF9yKwWLc67kmOXd+zuIbGrpuHFegDrYZOHHN9R+VLMZjLzPB9NW4cAofbP1DaZVisYQpfScL75mcvDiCZiq2NE8t7g9KF+BFgpDgDZR2ZGxRDhh9b/s+z5vOIQ9H5bjlnO7Kkdy8JTsqzpDivO+hgcI9LUS0z8iSIlBdPLSahWzG0lcdiA6TBfrdEZQXPUYMknVD6qT5eEhrA03H++lzDXryV4fvJPEFLKtG/6p3mWiw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=4ZGGZwV2rpTBMgRIeIptYA8L11QhwvZ5vQ22M3CfXdU=; b=M660ipdJuOwcqHB6jS3naqzsjoA8f+P7ghjsx5HXao2gzAxtr7tRCDM2dOVTowBXfS9qbX9pLrCLSmsnl+BC5rsG0GMI6nZq8YngRHPJB7RMKr4oR+74rNBSMqok68GQm78SQO/wUaFU0jDxkRielpTnogVXFaD36gnKSRPjtsDPKjG+mTWSrjdFViUaCg9af6KB3Hk9majxknW3qXEFE/RXUihlxuuknRH8aTnVf32rSp5HqLsUCj7tPqtN/lTXkn43igqE+NyPAJ7zU2Q95jsNg5jApLSIkKU/RWFrcHeybUznlzqJ6EqNP1jGARJK2bc4QwhhPswjcPpjU1wkjQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=4ZGGZwV2rpTBMgRIeIptYA8L11QhwvZ5vQ22M3CfXdU=; b=jpDrL8gHHUMFiPzniPcogH8/YXYu9YF0clhEtpMXWqBiXzcwrBd09YyBM4taTclSMT2DBRrgv06Cnq5WMjSLZ31LbHn7NSHflr4cWsUtt5eQp/suJ2l4zCJUkV64hBZ2uWGEJdg0pzl9q7tNMOlpbZcnsrWrKNWvsjEuYfQrTdc= Received: from HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:82::14) by HE1PR07MB3307.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:2f::21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3541.13; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 18:58:40 +0000 Received: from HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c99c:9978:10bb:e231]) by HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c99c:9978:10bb:e231%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3541.015; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 18:58:40 +0000 From: =?Windows-1252?Q?G=F6ran_Selander?= To: Michael Richardson , Ace Wg CC: Daniel Migault Thread-Topic: [Ace] Charter discussion Thread-Index: AQHWoxucbAjxceIga0igx21acPgYqam2JmJSgACgxICAABg4vw== Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 18:58:40 +0000 Message-ID: References: , <25440.1604424483@localhost> In-Reply-To: <25440.1604424483@localhost> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: sandelman.ca; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;sandelman.ca; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com; x-originating-ip: [83.251.145.232] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: a8ceb838-6401-4b16-c379-08d8802a7a67 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HE1PR07MB3307: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:6108; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: Hsk3S4QkCZWxQe6hcsHY60AIROsznCLI8dyx7xT0tFSF5QmO+r5DJAhvQhkwFok1Zb70xln1F2R3sdXD2TCwwYBtTZIML7Wa3ZV6v9MoEfJnXWR/hNsRs4m5n8DHg1MhbqHm8aSQ+QThzWswUqoh3wUzmKZYL5x3qaZOQG4zTYD7fMUrbYm/U1COziIA3DXuBU2lq4mFA9WNWgQ0ejv9qRRD+SyLJuXhpsei9I+Wj5vvGMpHaCwsCej37nxdtQiAYsAPWP/cW+kUjMNP6MVPqkHaaHR/T/TFEzOdZs5SbIzhY8f62JBta6zgurR0KCnTusvqMCGNr1xqhAu7Xu2OQioE1eDDWzSHp3HSQ9ctKeUOAZrRwy8UtVp1uSrbqnjSNlOBkZcRfzCXW565ZBJSpg== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(396003)(136003)(376002)(346002)(39860400002)(366004)(33656002)(2906002)(8936002)(110136005)(53546011)(7696005)(316002)(6506007)(186003)(26005)(71200400001)(8676002)(478600001)(76116006)(66946007)(66556008)(64756008)(66476007)(66446008)(4744005)(86362001)(66574015)(55016002)(9686003)(52536014)(166002)(966005)(4326008)(5660300002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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 x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_HE1PR0702MB36745B30CA3CEB32BB7EAE57F4110HE1PR0702MB3674_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: a8ceb838-6401-4b16-c379-08d8802a7a67 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 03 Nov 2020 18:58:40.2198 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: p26WOmSG47ALLLmFQNvgkZGkzxCZ2pqOfbXyZRIUCnqOU4QAKqjLVIXi3zXFopeA0/rSiEDTw7JLw48fjKinUZJxga109Bx6yzllzEDRb7E= X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR07MB3307 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 18:58:54 -0000 --_000_HE1PR0702MB36745B30CA3CEB32BB7EAE57F4110HE1PR0702MB3674_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2020-11-03, 19:45, "Ace" wrote: G=F6ran Selander wrote: > The scope of the Working Group includes profiles of the Enrolment ove= r Secure Transport (EST) transported with the Constrained Application Proto= col (CoAP)=94 Is this a re-interpretation of the charter, or a proposed charter change? This is a draft proposed change. Other parts of the new charter text descri= bes both work that has been done and work that may come. This text is inten= ded to capture both. G=F6ran -- Michael Richardson > = . o O ( IPv6 I=F8T consulting ) Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide _______________________________________________ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace --_000_HE1PR0702MB36745B30CA3CEB32BB7EAE57F4110HE1PR0702MB3674_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

&nbs= p;

&nbs= p;

On 2020-11-03, 19:45, "Ace" <ace-bounces@ietf.org> wrote:

 

G=F6ran Selander wrote:=

 

    = ;> The scope of the Working Group includes profiles of the Enrolment ove= r Secure Transport (EST) transported with the Constrained Application Proto= col (CoAP)=94

 

Is this a re-interpreta= tion of the charter, or a proposed charter change?

 

This is a draft proposed change= . Other parts of the new charter text describes both work that has been don= e and work that may come. This text is intended to capture both.=

 

G=F6ran

 

 

 

--

Michael Richardson <= mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca> = ;  . o O ( IPv6 I=F8T consulting )

    = ;       Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa = and Worldwide

 

_______________________= ________________________

Ace mailing list

 

 

--_000_HE1PR0702MB36745B30CA3CEB32BB7EAE57F4110HE1PR0702MB3674_-- From nobody Tue Nov 3 19:35:56 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 687553A1387 for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 19:35:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=i1aanUXS; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=etAL0hgI Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tG3iMlc5youE for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 19:35:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from alln-iport-8.cisco.com (alln-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.142.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D32C53A138B for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 19:35:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=30816; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1604460951; x=1605670551; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=j9/93Rl2DV/ibjhzQjikbfPBVmFLlnZKARxIR/BIpTU=; b=i1aanUXSJYzWxKAL6wtctVBqJZggVRPDzEWwFi0RI04R+078M+I8Z+CK P95ZZg0EjZqdoSuzfXvsrxrc77xKymxy18OcoUIHZD3qc91X02Yy3lqcN Ygci69RdNnxt6MzWAHvSU9ohJ+1DSqcUr7JN9XzX0DziWe3RoLDFLEFLL w=; X-Files: smime.p7s : 4024 IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AL5hrERFgrtgoZTqIjONvwJ1GYnJ96bzpIg4Y7I?= =?us-ascii?q?YmgLtSc6Oluo7vJ1Hb+e401gObUYDS8fkCiufKvebnQ2NTqZqCsXVXdptKWl?= =?us-ascii?q?dFjMgNhAUvDYaDDlGzN//laSE2XaEgHF9o9n22Kw5ZTcD5YVCBrni79zVUGx?= =?us-ascii?q?jjO0xyPOumUoLXht68gua1/ZCbag5UhT27NLV1Khj+rQjYusQMx4V4LaNkwR?= =?us-ascii?q?rSqXwOcONTlm4=3D?= X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ChCABQIKJf/5pdJa1igQmBT4EjLyM?= =?us-ascii?q?uB3AsLS8uCod8A41PihOObIEuFIERA1QEBwEBAQoDAQEgDQIEAQGESgKCCgI?= =?us-ascii?q?lNgcOAgMBAQsBAQUBAQECAQYEcYVhDIVyAQEBAQMSGxMBASwCBAYPAgEIEQQ?= =?us-ascii?q?BARYLBwcCHxEUCQgCBAESCAYUgwWBfk0DHw8BDgOkQwKBO4hodIE0gwQBAQW?= =?us-ascii?q?BMwEDAw1BgnwNC4IJBwMGgTiBU4EfhHeBPoQTG4FBP4ERQ4JPPoIbQgEBAgE?= =?us-ascii?q?BFX8JHAEBIhUWCQmDC4IskDBBi0yBaZhzOFQKgm2EUIJigViIO4QxhTWDGIo?= =?us-ascii?q?SlEOTTYp4gm6SXgIEAgQFAg4BAQWBWwYtKg2BIHAVO4JpEz0XAg2OKxeDToU?= =?us-ascii?q?UhUR0AgE1AgYBCQEBAwl8iwgtgQYBMV8BAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,449,1596499200"; d="p7s'?scan'208,217";a="598382353" Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by alln-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 04 Nov 2020 03:35:50 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (xch-aln-004.cisco.com [173.36.7.14]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 0A43ZomY027356 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 4 Nov 2020 03:35:50 GMT Received: from xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) by XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (173.36.7.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 21:35:50 -0600 Received: from xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) by xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 22:35:48 -0500 Received: from NAM11-BN8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 21:35:48 -0600 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=TqaPt94Wi2nNcwapmcSlHUB1NUD18+FpDXB2jCryDkZat7LqBSmEuqtW15krvevUdwwncBGPs26kwt89+ATPJPFlUtYdyfWqn+rD8JwoS/WG9QR2p1AO6RcTYaoJF2Hble563TiPl3YaJcLucMLy0ZvQkRkRsdk0PHgtRBdeIPX+QeNBWyetnKjoixSg5K4aklVcW017Xe3hgbzE8IljXffok8u9b++2q/yXmYkknBr1r9RlY7VyftwjUJXywgULdL5+AcXjTDXsLPhstl+/d2pV/no3mg7k3BFzmQ5WX8rwV5dsvksfRgkCquD7YoZ3UfPQjNm3+3zC6I7OPyEZ1w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=iRNJpsF0mPDm3fL4xbgZBBji4Z2WffNaKGXxdhB+nmE=; b=eDc9Zy7BertA2ERSuGvVl2UqzjqB2UXTHuEqRuyXiDoOxgtnp4ZHyDpHwiZC4aT/INvijqifImR+hZt5N04rYeAKZQ1EI6kgaxfo5eEOCXMK2sHOcOf1PLTtBesrkpUu+4z5nNBQb5CYMgwGQD2VH6QGb6Bm8rF1uY4xUlb4ZkVO4EKfMIvUiJOZpJ5riaK+r2JG/PFP3B5dW1GqS8ajWR+xqfEFtfB9PAvSxAPtYzzExz7ohHwkZy/ixncMIT+MZk4hHNjE6SWGiP4bKxQIQtWoeaxqsW6NpKjDcxwsLP9gRnPx233LyydMK2QAiQvs1lJ/j35XfkiT4Taeo6FiwA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=iRNJpsF0mPDm3fL4xbgZBBji4Z2WffNaKGXxdhB+nmE=; b=etAL0hgIgQZKsyfzpoagomWu9x+5Qi+UcL1DPuNNGMa3GwK2hX6v9aBDV6FNpMwJGeChJDieQ6ET95Ss1TtH1pU4EHQticSLV4JypltmTWYDLGUY6doQkdn1Nxflykzr0/aFTDswlhJS/cwDOH9VSc5zVYXhxFjzDuiKK5k76rw= Received: from BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:406:af::18) by BN6PR11MB4162.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:405:84::12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3499.24; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 03:35:46 +0000 Received: from BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1dc1:e7f4:84ef:3711]) by BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1dc1:e7f4:84ef:3711%6]) with mapi id 15.20.3499.030; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 03:35:46 +0000 From: "Panos Kampanakis (pkampana)" To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Selander?= , Daniel Migault , Ace Wg Thread-Topic: [Ace] Charter discussion Thread-Index: AQHWoxtrcodXjqWDJUyIaw3LXSI/oqm2S5IAgAElT0A= Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 03:35:45 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: dmarc.ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc.ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=cisco.com; x-originating-ip: [68.93.142.48] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: fe0acebd-1d74-43ee-6391-08d88072b798 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BN6PR11MB4162: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 5UNy5oUrLdPC/uXOkW3OH6GwwCam+kU990REf0xD2v3+FGP558lKx7HREgYp/8byrIQAFFEZ/AEN+qdo34dXlihHdVTbiwDgsdm7mbxOZeoSWKN+52V/7wa3yEVNxabg9QuiA+VfC9VEYZPEIOYLBveN1wf3zhkZ7H6ImFgAJYYz8v8tnSC1NSjwPI3RDpbYrQjPMaym40ft1US9IA9O9Yq3QkR3nZ0ISDmaGIBerivjaNVoUh/I7iQlBGpAXacF+SihzFFmzif4jk2pZ6jiQmQVcxx5IvgNRe2mgHcykiHh/CZg5NokH1DQjBqwH7WxYBimoOqW4KzYHjnxrEdrZbzUXfaeRwqHnDHkx4uusSUC6044XGKmdPpyDVdYcOCYfBxgkVRI0bsOQb+uDIkiIve04z7LTw8GFhrrtkyvn1rqLTf2V4qW4mIz71TKgrNbgMMU3S7kUV1F9+DQ4muOww== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(346002)(366004)(376002)(136003)(39860400002)(396003)(8676002)(71200400001)(8936002)(5660300002)(99936003)(66616009)(66446008)(66476007)(52536014)(66574015)(33656002)(86362001)(66946007)(66556008)(64756008)(83380400001)(76116006)(4001150100001)(6506007)(53546011)(2906002)(110136005)(166002)(9686003)(966005)(7696005)(478600001)(55016002)(316002)(26005)(186003)(15940465004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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 x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.1; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01D6B231.A9D44210" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: fe0acebd-1d74-43ee-6391-08d88072b798 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Nov 2020 03:35:46.6250 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: nBj5q5WpxQ3uFXcBUIjDWSObCTIDVWoVSMOobd7IKBFkE8iVqA5q6ut63TgHW0hGJ75eNWMR1DJeu5p7e73lWA== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN6PR11MB4162 X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.14, xch-aln-004.cisco.com X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-3.cisco.com Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 03:35:54 -0000 ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01D6B231.A9D44210 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0008_01D6B231.A9D44210" ------=_NextPart_001_0008_01D6B231.A9D44210 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I support the addition of draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore in the = Charter as it introduces OSCORE with its advantages in constrained environments = for EST which is already standardized in EST-coaps in ACE.=20 =20 As I have said before, I oppose the addition of CMPv2 over COAP in the charter. Summarizing the reasons here again for brevity: - we should not repeat the mistakes of the past and introduce multiple protocols doing the same thing (cert enrollment or management) over COAP unless there is a compelling reason. To answer your other question = Daniel, I don=92t think we need a new certificate management protocol at this = stage.=20 - I am not convinced of the technical advantages of using CMPv2 over = COAP in constrained environments.=20 - I have not seen overwhelming support for the draft in the list other = than Michael saying =93why not=94 and Steffen and Hendrik (from Siemens) = clearly supporting it. Also, minutes from IETF-108 say =93DM: Objections to = doing this work? No objections registered=94. I was not there to oppose, but I = would not call that overwhelming active support either.=20 - it is not clear who intends to use and implement the draft. If it is a = one or two vendor thing then I don=92t think ACE should spend the cycles. I = have not seen many people chiming in that want to the draft and are willing = to review.=20 =20 Rgs, Panos =20 =20 From: Ace On Behalf Of G=F6ran Selander Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2020 5:06 AM To: Daniel Migault ; Ace Wg Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion =20 Hi Daniel, and all, =20 Some comments on the proposed charter and your mail, sorry for late response. =20 =20 1. =94The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and = existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of the framework for additional secure communications protocols=94 =20 I take it this text covers (should the WG want to adopt): =20 * draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile * an ACE-EDHOC profile (i.e. the POST /token response and the access token provision information to support authentication with EDHOC, e.g. = raw public key of the other party). Such a profile could provide good trust management properties, potentially at the cost of a larger access token = etc. =20 Right? =20 2. =94In particular the discussion might revive a discussion that happened = in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired = work such as [3]. Please make this discussion constructive on this thread.=94 =20 As I remember it, the outcome of this discussion was =96 in line with = the mindset of EST =96 that it is beneficial to re-use authentication and communication security appropriate for actual use case. If coaps is = suitable for a particular use case, then it makes sense to protect also the = enrolment procedure with this protocol. But whereas the security protocol is coaps instead of https, the enrolment functionality and semantics should reuse that of EST, possibly profiled for the new setting: [4].=20 =20 In the same spirit there was support at the meeting [2] to specify protection of EST payloads profiled for use with OSCORE as communication security protocol, together with a suitable AKE for authentication. Following the adoption of EDHOC in LAKE this work has now been revived = [5]. IMHO the reasoning above still makes sense. =20 With this in mind, and taking into account recent discussion on the = list, perhaps this part of the charter: =20 =94The Working Group will standardize how to use Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) as a Transport Medium for the Certificate management protocol version 2 (CMPv2). =94 =20 should be rephrased or complemented with the reasoning above, for = example: =20 The scope of the Working Group includes profiles of the Enrolment over Secure Transport (EST) transported with the Constrained Application = Protocol (CoAP)=94=20 =20 Thanks G=F6ran =20 [4] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-coap-est [5] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore =20 =20 =20 =20 On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" > wrote: Hi,=20 I would like to start the charter discussion. Here is a draft of a = proposed charter [1].=20 =20 It seems to be that additional discussion is needed with regard to the = last paragraph related certificate management. In particular the discussion = might revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair = of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please make this discussion constructive on this thread.=20 =20 The fundamental question is whether we need certificate management at = this stage. If the answer is yes, and we have multiple proposals, it would be good to clarify the position of the different proposals and evaluate = whether a selection is needed or not before validating the charter.=20 =20 Please provide your inputs on the mailing list before October 30. Of = course for minor edits, you may suggest them directly on the google doc. =20 Yours,=20 Daniel =20 [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBXh= oDi ptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing &q=3D1&e=3D6924b2a6-e7e5-4ec1-a1af-c94637953dc5&u=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fdocs.go= ogle.com% 2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBXhoDiptY%2Fedit%3Fus= p%3 Dsharing>=20 [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-interim-2017-ace-03-201710191300= / [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-selander-ace-eals/ =20 --=20 Daniel Migault =20 Ericsson ------=_NextPart_001_0008_01D6B231.A9D44210 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I support the addition of = draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore in the Charter as it introduces = OSCORE with its advantages in constrained environments for EST which is = already standardized in EST-coaps in ACE.

 

As I have said before, I = oppose the addition of CMPv2 over COAP in the charter. Summarizing the = reasons here again for brevity:

- we should not repeat = the mistakes of the past and introduce multiple protocols doing the same = thing (cert enrollment or management) over COAP unless there is a = compelling reason. To answer your other question Daniel, I don’t = think we need a new certificate management protocol at this stage. =

- I am not convinced of the technical advantages = of using CMPv2 over COAP in constrained environments. =

- I have not seen overwhelming support for the = draft in the list other than Michael saying “why not” and = Steffen and Hendrik (from Siemens) clearly supporting it. Also, minutes = from IETF-108 say “DM: Objections to doing this work? No = objections registered”. I was not there to oppose, but I would not = call that overwhelming active support either.

- it is not clear who = intends to use and implement the draft. If it is a one or two vendor = thing then I don’t think ACE should spend the cycles. I have not = seen many people chiming in that want to the draft and are willing to = review.

 

Rgs,

Panos

 

 

From: Ace = <ace-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of G=F6ran = Selander
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2020 5:06 = AM
To: Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>; Ace Wg = <ace@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter = discussion

 

Hi Daniel, and all,

 

Some comments on the proposed charter and your mail, = sorry for late response.  

 

1.

”The = Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and existing = profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of the = framework for additional secure communications protocols”

 

I take it = this text covers (should the WG want to adopt):

 

  • draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile
  • an ACE-EDHOC profile (i.e. the POST /token response and the access = token provision information to support authentication with EDHOC, e.g. = raw public key of the other party). Such a profile could provide good = trust management properties, potentially at the cost of a larger access = token etc.

 

Right?

 

2.

”In = particular the discussion might revive a discussion that happened in = 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired = work such as [3]. Please make this discussion constructive on this = thread.”

 

As I = remember it, the outcome of this discussion was – in line with the = mindset of EST – that it is beneficial to re-use authentication = and communication security appropriate for actual use case. If coaps is = suitable for a particular use case, then it makes sense to protect also = the enrolment procedure with this protocol. But whereas the security = protocol is coaps instead of https, the enrolment functionality and = semantics should reuse that of EST, possibly profiled for the new = setting: [4].

 

In the same = spirit there was support at the meeting [2] to specify protection of EST = payloads profiled for use with OSCORE as communication security = protocol, together with a suitable AKE for authentication. Following the = adoption of EDHOC in LAKE this work has now been revived [5]. IMHO the = reasoning above still makes sense.

 

With this in = mind, and taking into account recent discussion on the list, perhaps = this part of the charter:

 

”The = Working Group will standardize how to use Constrained Application = Protocol (CoAP) as a Transport Medium for the Certificate management = protocol version 2 (CMPv2).   ”

 

should be = rephrased or complemented with the reasoning above, for = example:

 

The scope = of the Working Group includes profiles of the Enrolment over = Secure Transport (EST) transported with the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)”

 

Thanks

G=F6ran

 

[4] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-coap-est

[5] h= ttps://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore

 

 

 

 

On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" <ace-bounces@ietf.org> = wrote:

Hi,

I would like to start the = charter discussion. Here is a draft of a proposed charter [1]. =

 

It seems to be that = additional discussion is needed with regard to the last paragraph = related certificate management. In particular the discussion might = revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair = of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please make this = discussion constructive on this thread.

 

The fundamental question is = whether we need certificate management at this stage. If the answer is = yes, and we have multiple proposals, it would be good to clarify the = position of the different proposals and evaluate whether a selection is = needed or not before validating the charter. =

 

Please provide your inputs = on the mailing list before October 30. Of course for minor edits, you = may suggest them directly on the google doc.

 

Yours, =

Daniel

 

------=_NextPart_001_0008_01D6B231.A9D44210-- ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01D6B231.A9D44210 Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExDzANBglghkgBZQMEAgEFADCABgkqhkiG9w0BBwEAAKCCDGkw ggNDMIICK6ADAgECAhBf+HsoK1TcjUKjFbVoya3/MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMDUxFjAUBgNVBAoT DUNpc2NvIFN5c3RlbXMxGzAZBgNVBAMTEkNpc2NvIFJvb3QgQ0EgMjA0ODAeFw0wNDA1MTQyMDE3 MTJaFw0yOTA1MTQyMDI1NDJaMDUxFjAUBgNVBAoTDUNpc2NvIFN5c3RlbXMxGzAZBgNVBAMTEkNp c2NvIFJvb3QgQ0EgMjA0ODCCASAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggENADCCAQgCggEBALCauaunrwp3 p+JxtrRmYpR4iEfGYlWEQDK/wKsupRxx1rxue6iqum7SFYhIRZ2i/IPQzLmM4CZocEp43yEXnvRh BckVyM8W2jVhiZRDqISoMZh4m7lObyxTEmzNHa0rJLsxxCv/g0Rvtj0kdwnqvyqoH2pW9iAPEVSX gXWnJc5ZaoJl77fq5+KNdYtu8t1Ppl5inM8QCmTQTm3OK8xb9WClJ0eNafR/zhtw3nAbINZuzaYB qDwS0qk/oGteu44gi3qR47Vo7qDnxAF0qFMLK0qaD2USDoJNjmP97+ubGttTphNgr8J918dsFyXU c/tHZFCBgJRM4b+uSxzfku0uBd8CAQOjUTBPMAsGA1UdDwQEAwIBhjAPBgNVHRMBAf8EBTADAQH/ MB0GA1UdDgQWBBQn88gVHm6aAgkWrSugiWBf2nsvqjAQBgkrBgEEAYI3FQEEAwIBADANBgkqhkiG 9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAnZ2EhKNBqXx3DLdTyk5EUGLvVHzTdRcc6ODGSEu2/kw6GYFWsFbuGZZiqlqj ZMH2TlQzxnf+xRy65V0lyvXwk5qDES7my/h0Rf7nBbir59/LS+E3hNq5i5dwHvDii9ew2A6dsWnW KpF7qUlPfuaOldiDJzzVaEkO1J32LuunvuswpKwfRPyVqzMG+31gCt60imOwnKnypLlTAYfQaKQn f6v/6frJQDiIZ7Q5xoRvV8lT27qO7sBDsvgJg27/Zs8+7xezWBglCTRe48vWFLbs8pJvdOQvgSrV kpHg4Jc8MmgFhUvR91fiUh2TGlSfBXDASnFgHkMLYB7+o86BGeELNTCCBG4wggNWoAMCAQICCmEQ gG0AAAAAAA4wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwNTEWMBQGA1UEChMNQ2lzY28gU3lzdGVtczEbMBkGA1UE AxMSQ2lzY28gUm9vdCBDQSAyMDQ4MB4XDTE0MDQwNDIwMjQxOFoXDTI5MDUxNDIwMjU0MlowLDEO MAwGA1UEChMFQ2lzY28xGjAYBgNVBAMTEUNpc2NvIEVtcGxveWVlIENBMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0B AQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAyt9+FkxTFfsjVs3GuWUKBJXl3kxFZ4wMxwbgqx9tXzcqe+fto62A fxHI84Lr7p9Q2cm/PaEvuzwRBzXvuKXZUU7ZsPdToJSALCySZa0Qb6GGa19ACpmlUEQakE3P5kz7 RgaNSOMH1+GtY9fV6CcAFb9uB7JDu2UGL332WV2bEsUsfb3rRLBS4cL8Hu2dWfcdk6erMaZCQjkn 04FixlQsJozbPRTQqI4V6iikG/69rDyeTdbVTK+My/9LnwVsD3GBMiRh7RmrvupxtGiMu8j05Is/ d1OifhWecwvjV3Reg9Lok8bMNJEMAped1weTdVS0X4MsAheosJBld9lS5O4idwIDAQABo4IBhzCC AYMwEAYJKwYBBAGCNxUBBAMCAQAwHQYDVR0OBBYEFJ+VNrSOXdVLwwrBpymTQ1EG/YlRMBkGCSsG AQQBgjcUAgQMHgoAUwB1AGIAQwBBMAsGA1UdDwQEAwIBhjASBgNVHRMBAf8ECDAGAQH/AgEAMB8G A1UdIwQYMBaAFCfzyBUebpoCCRatK6CJYF/aey+qMEMGA1UdHwQ8MDowOKA2oDSGMmh0dHA6Ly93 d3cuY2lzY28uY29tL3NlY3VyaXR5L3BraS9jcmwvY3JjYTIwNDguY3JsMFAGCCsGAQUFBwEBBEQw QjBABggrBgEFBQcwAoY0aHR0cDovL3d3dy5jaXNjby5jb20vc2VjdXJpdHkvcGtpL2NlcnRzL2Ny Y2EyMDQ4LmNlcjBcBgNVHSAEVTBTMFEGCisGAQQBCRUBFQAwQzBBBggrBgEFBQcCARY1aHR0cDov L3d3dy5jaXNjby5jb20vc2VjdXJpdHkvcGtpL3BvbGljaWVzL2luZGV4Lmh0bWwwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEFBQADggEBAD5OviMaRgKNXmvbigI0C2Ob5QE8Jl2McLIk62Be7IqEZC4bWRWjZxrhFuP94E19 RJojKNLttveiH+dEze1t6oYhVCisbGG8+8hlUARAiiqL/J9uGJ71xT6loqkcAK5xphe7STJLSlgT k0w26fcvDeiA6zhdVHnKhVKkpOJWd9MNByFOnCQyDOK+pcNxLU6IN9TwL1ZoRkdFa11QiCX3Oimk 8YhBrVN+VzGGKtbgZ4fYU6uBo3V3vtshyDpHtGkn1e7f9/TWcY26etFzL33dzaZ4lChlw4l3XkLq 6AfCEDF5djpBdiCRjwpBUIIbCSmyESBvA+sL4j8i1vo/uEartrAwggSsMIIDlKADAgECAgoBhhEi QTzquitVMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBCwUAMCwxDjAMBgNVBAoTBUNpc2NvMRowGAYDVQQDExFDaXNjbyBF bXBsb3llZSBDQTAeFw0xOTEyMjAxOTQ5MDJaFw0yMTEyMTkxOTU5MDJaMIGfMSQwIgYDVQQDExtQ YW5vcyBLYW1wYW5ha2lzIChwa2FtcGFuYSkxFDASBgNVBAsTC0Npc2NvIFVzZXJzMRIwEAYDVQQL EwlFbXBsb3llZXMxEzARBgoJkiaJk/IsZAEZEwNjb20xFTATBgoJkiaJk/IsZAEZEwVjaXNjbzEh MB8GCSqGSIb3DQEJAQwScGthbXBhbmFAY2lzY28uY29tMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8A MIIBCgKCAQEAmIHTLIzoAnuMUiHMx8V+PF9JpAcB7zrNHOY1Vj1R1Vx7ty7m9yo9G991T2n7zHo4 UzF6tnB9NxzQOKCY54oqP5KjVGYOPPo+qZ+2rx1GABzdKUF4LwUUKOTf9uXAtvsvIRUc5J/csShT jcUIvtVmiAzWXWRfMYShjBYBVtx/h8fDqAqfFAzd6HG0TcdsN/BRb9k6QEW1afHjPKlRUaDRELyj nFGJZd2OsUJ7/aKMdFmQFd2CAJYzsuwLYjeqJsuGNzBc/k6mzQPf6FW17nz17G41KReU0UdZf2yZ jvimkwCQ/yW8SVTOcGBP+Zk+Lq5EYEGQMu1qtNK/97bXMc5kuwIDAQABo4IBWjCCAVYwDgYDVR0P AQH/BAQDAgTwMAwGA1UdEwEB/wQCMAAwegYIKwYBBQUHAQEEbjBsMDwGCCsGAQUFBzAChjBodHRw Oi8vd3d3LmNpc2NvLmNvbS9zZWN1cml0eS9wa2kvY2VydHMvY2VjYS5jZXIwLAYIKwYBBQUHMAGG IGh0dHA6Ly9wa2ljdnMuY2lzY28uY29tL3BraS9vY3NwMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFJ+VNrSOXdVLwwrB pymTQ1EG/YlRMDoGA1UdHwQzMDEwL6AtoCuGKWh0dHA6Ly9jaXNjb2NlcnRzLmNpc2NvLmNvbS9m aWxlL2NlY2EuY3JsMB0GA1UdEQQWMBSBEnBrYW1wYW5hQGNpc2NvLmNvbTAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUjrl7 6Mrrdw3ZYFiTpZBdtrUm5P4wHwYDVR0lBBgwFgYKKwYBBAGCNwoDDAYIKwYBBQUHAwQwDQYJKoZI hvcNAQELBQADggEBAMhR6xCTygu68lppjWebXTXYznix5961hcmwiJRkPtUIGQ5JQwXyCwq/Juuq yc5ebeq9cQEO5iqyxik/UAQ35BlmKb7SNLi75RtFE/AIZrRsEjTUoO2EtCMQOEMcenWa2XE8fEID BkwzreKeaOchCbDd4L9PvKFht6nDDFtb6VZdWs4ort+J3iFeilVf3oI5MSVi+qroWaFLnLYTQGTn qEjWANfKw3RRBAMdoPCZ+N4eftAk1TWVS08nOsPoKWXtIqX6y0ZPs/EZjBSk57v1TPLpYhEqYGXI oGJlIvzIAfYNoUg8yP8toG5T7x+7hRz0MMUGWcCDsS9PMFxH6SnrUSMxggMNMIIDCQIBATA6MCwx DjAMBgNVBAoTBUNpc2NvMRowGAYDVQQDExFDaXNjbyBFbXBsb3llZSBDQQIKAYYRIkE86rorVTAN BglghkgBZQMEAgEFAKCCAaQwGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUx DxcNMjAxMTA0MDMzNTQyWjAvBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxIgQgQ0vXFveB6lmrLbrRaSxSl0p4kOyu00Dc xLmKzNNEoicwSQYJKwYBBAGCNxAEMTwwOjAsMQ4wDAYDVQQKEwVDaXNjbzEaMBgGA1UEAxMRQ2lz Y28gRW1wbG95ZWUgQ0ECCgGGESJBPOq6K1UwSwYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAgsxPKA6MCwxDjAMBgNVBAoT BUNpc2NvMRowGAYDVQQDExFDaXNjbyBFbXBsb3llZSBDQQIKAYYRIkE86rorVTCBoAYJKoZIhvcN AQkPMYGSMIGPMAsGCWCGSAFlAwQBKjALBglghkgBZQMEARYwCgYIKoZIhvcNAwcwCwYJYIZIAWUD BAECMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgIAgDANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBQDALBglghkgBZQMEAgEwCwYJKoZIhvcN AQEKMAsGCWCGSAFlAwQCAzALBglghkgBZQMEAgIwBwYFKw4DAhowDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAEggEA GZdfutdb9up8UwBE3qacj26X++vO3Al319+e2498imKUeRY9T4pWPVm+4J8Glph5ZfgJTg2RsAck WU3nADabhTDPXvFzj41kwE1geZuf3TzQcG8HsGKYimw69kFKDNfpuFfYG3RK0CwzM6vAHRVAkzyW hJEhWSyPnU87N672KU6eZ9OeJccvLzHhVxiHxiAoksoqhZ6+SZf6nlolNOR7fT5JZyaP2shSbaQ/ 6rBBwphOS2oC3TLUqMUdLhZY7Y6Kte6C2UKcBFx83TXszjxuxRH1E/YeXGnN2cPdtkNmL1rmTbMG itceVFJH4I+uzC6jfaJYZls3y1W+J7z3pjohywAAAAAAAA== ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01D6B231.A9D44210-- From nobody Wed Nov 4 09:38:35 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 415333A0A4A for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 09:38:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.267 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.267 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, LH_URI_DOM_IN_PATH=1.533, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=siemens.onmicrosoft.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E-T5dMeR-0WP for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 09:38:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from EUR02-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr20040.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.2.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 978E93A0DD6 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 09:38:31 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Tlgr+CNFkei0ufWbcjrIeTcIdMcW4quaOdYpUbZ2S/cDeBmtzCqb9CK1ZDEAxfR+ZsU1TLPlhFZYEIAsKtAYuAe03izwm/5rrvcJhDaKgG0bJdqYnBztNfSf952m4Cb2Rtdn5aNL1hGkmRvI1/Bph6Dw8PWbKUC1zOcsq+DmMXNEM4+xlV7+d4xHmK3za+MbWJ1wJlXAuODiWzuDrz0X99ETg+76LhvmHXezbFwFkEVnr0qAnKWZt98LpDthfL2mf1sWrPdP/ZZrcAqjpfDbGH9KnOlL5CpkgmuVNfGw+qzza4liQRfqR8K6rHfnlAaTAKXYWC7ijrsJNEId2ihdTw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=RzoJjl8KQYXCtKmvHZgNibi1h8KqT0e6DbJUtD1oDnI=; b=RGTTkYqCBd7Ldlm3JPeZr6AtKZ2/2btk9WadyhrwYKYA6oMAghEz1ToMmE7xu2xwAuIQ8O6K3ao38bHLKAe20SGbLeHzAv+440OjggtFiunqe1DesIa4qrUxVNlkZYXrZDYSdgaO27nfeiK5aJkXrx6FEZsj4XY15Ptg8XxF1vhIc2tHryEPcUC+z6MGbAb5ZT251nNFCjcm0puVKX0Tnw6gUgj4hKVDk3MboqGOyiktvRSMF8OAEREN7/Yc2Dfg8Bm/vLy1rAcaPWliwdjQRBKsFXrxyxuW4Bq3i0zdoqLMRdxiBF+3WG37se4UfsTTi5em5OjwzLKCoLo8hBVh9w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=siemens.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=siemens.com; dkim=pass header.d=siemens.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=siemens.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-siemens-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=RzoJjl8KQYXCtKmvHZgNibi1h8KqT0e6DbJUtD1oDnI=; b=irMA5IR7Arclfopn110Df8pqpSnErSVPdmaIFhSCBt1DEgaRTHr4X8Wpze832XaTz5NAg6JvcNHfBL/ToWpE/EyN793w6YlUvq3+b7YKUTpIogu3XBOj2Bd3d5LGwiFJB88cUZRZIHlAQBR+Y3YQVf3NmuLY6WBuJEZdawtl/tg= Received: from AM0PR10MB2418.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:208:dd::17) by AM0PR10MB3473.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:20b:151::24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3499.27; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:38:29 +0000 Received: from AM0PR10MB2418.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::48d8:f723:944:efe6]) by AM0PR10MB2418.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::48d8:f723:944:efe6%6]) with mapi id 15.20.3499.032; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:38:29 +0000 From: "Brockhaus, Hendrik" To: Ace Wg , "Panos Kampanakis (pkampana)" CC: =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Selander?= , Daniel Migault Thread-Topic: [Ace] Charter discussion Thread-Index: AQHWoxtjVCYB49eUE0iMxKcy60l0Nam2S5IAgAElX4CAAOWqsA== Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:38:28 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: msip_labels: MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_Enabled=true; MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_SetDate=2020-11-04T17:38:27Z; MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_Method=Standard; MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_Name=restricted-default; MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_SiteId=38ae3bcd-9579-4fd4-adda-b42e1495d55a; MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_ActionId=0f00faf7-57af-42d5-adb4-13a82fe72761; MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_ContentBits=0 document_confidentiality: Restricted authentication-results: ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=siemens.com; x-originating-ip: [165.225.200.147] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 04183e94-63a5-4ed3-36be-08d880e8710a x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: AM0PR10MB3473: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: qeNCdX6z65Y0/4n1svf46JxhG1m9zuDVrfCkIdr5+0lMA6x1FgDfH4/zEXQZ7trcaVNyepQu7UJm4qA3VcHoaWgKwvQY3/YVCBApgF2yXBZ/LnnPV6pw5G8DB6pG+W7aiXq0r6E7s/6sssRfo592K2kPOcgYEk3+70/PFhWsU5TphhPgCiqBR4uxczc/nMCPZq9ejNyG7SSFqanXzw73oWPIUj0YlfAUhhpd/98+lIWX/w/A3ZpZXHSdq5QLTwt3IfSSVJwgyOZYmDokCukTXD9JxzW968V97P3gg0rYrr5cwUN2/OsLnjmSShcAER5RQAiINFM1fVf9xAC9/xLXAfxDUfZ/bMA0XM/gjaQpdenTpRvuVEPfkClsio67fvSr5vVs2nyVA9AyofL6epzZ+w== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:AM0PR10MB2418.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(396003)(366004)(136003)(39860400002)(346002)(376002)(66946007)(76116006)(53546011)(55236004)(54906003)(110136005)(64756008)(966005)(66556008)(6506007)(9686003)(71200400001)(86362001)(316002)(8936002)(66574015)(66476007)(55016002)(66446008)(186003)(2906002)(5660300002)(26005)(7696005)(8676002)(4326008)(83380400001)(4001150100001)(33656002)(478600001)(52536014)(166002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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 x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_AM0PR10MB24188423CC124E1F9333EB50FEEF0AM0PR10MB2418EURP_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: siemens.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: AM0PR10MB2418.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 04183e94-63a5-4ed3-36be-08d880e8710a X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Nov 2020 17:38:28.8878 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 38ae3bcd-9579-4fd4-adda-b42e1495d55a X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 1bO5V46DunVlWEOr4PVvbk/ddMQAlBAJ7Vqk0vx097t1YlpEAPjcqlrMkmWiu3+lMx0y1ImaiTAl1IIAud53qSnW+RG+4berigIa4AW/Lxs= X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM0PR10MB3473 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 17:38:34 -0000 --_000_AM0PR10MB24188423CC124E1F9333EB50FEEF0AM0PR10MB2418EURP_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 handsh= ake as a pro of EST, I see in many environments exactly this as a drawback = of EST and a pro of CMP having all needed security on the application layer= . I do not see, why this should not be valid when using CoAP instead of HTT= P. As already pointed out, I do not believe we can address all requirements ou= t there by one certificate enrollment/management protocol. Important from my perspective is, as Panos also says, there are currently f= our votes in favor and only one clear vote against the adoption. Or did I m= iss further votes? Hendrik Von: Ace Im Auftrag von Panos Kampanakis (pkampana) Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. November 2020 04:36 An: G=F6ran Selander ; Dani= el Migault ; Ace Wg Betreff: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion I support the addition of draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore in the Charter= as it introduces OSCORE with its advantages in constrained environments fo= r EST which is already standardized in EST-coaps in ACE. As I have said before, I oppose the addition of CMPv2 over COAP in the char= ter. Summarizing the reasons here again for brevity: - we should not repeat the mistakes of the past and introduce multiple prot= ocols doing the same thing (cert enrollment or management) over COAP unless= there is a compelling reason. To answer your other question Daniel, I don'= t think we need a new certificate management protocol at this stage. - I am not convinced of the technical advantages of using CMPv2 over COAP i= n constrained environments. - I have not seen overwhelming support for the draft in the list other than= Michael saying "why not" and Steffen and Hendrik (from Siemens) clearly su= pporting it. Also, minutes from IETF-108 say "DM: Objections to doing this = work? No objections registered". I was not there to oppose, but I would not= call that overwhelming active support either. - it is not clear who intends to use and implement the draft. If it is a on= e or two vendor thing then I don't think ACE should spend the cycles. I hav= e not seen many people chiming in that want to the draft and are willing to= review. Rgs, Panos From: Ace > On Behalf Of = G=F6ran Selander Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2020 5:06 AM To: Daniel Migault >; Ace W= g > Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion Hi Daniel, and all, Some comments on the proposed charter and your mail, sorry for late respons= e. 1. "The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and existin= g profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of the frame= work for additional secure communications protocols" I take it this text covers (should the WG want to adopt): * draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile * an ACE-EDHOC profile (i.e. the POST /token response and the access to= ken provision information to support authentication with EDHOC, e.g. raw pu= blic key of the other party). Such a profile could provide good trust manag= ement properties, potentially at the cost of a larger access token etc. Right? 2. "In particular the discussion might revive a discussion that happened in 20= 17 [2] - when I was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work = such as [3]. Please make this discussion constructive on this thread." As I remember it, the outcome of this discussion was - in line with the min= dset of EST - that it is beneficial to re-use authentication and communicat= ion security appropriate for actual use case. If coaps is suitable for a pa= rticular use case, then it makes sense to protect also the enrolment proced= ure with this protocol. But whereas the security protocol is coaps instead = of https, the enrolment functionality and semantics should reuse that of ES= T, possibly profiled for the new setting: [4]. In the same spirit there was support at the meeting [2] to specify protecti= on of EST payloads profiled for use with OSCORE as communication security p= rotocol, together with a suitable AKE for authentication. Following the ado= ption of EDHOC in LAKE this work has now been revived [5]. IMHO the reasoni= ng above still makes sense. With this in mind, and taking into account recent discussion on the list, p= erhaps this part of the charter: "The Working Group will standardize how to use Constrained Application Prot= ocol (CoAP) as a Transport Medium for the Certificate management protocol v= ersion 2 (CMPv2). " should be rephrased or complemented with the reasoning above, for example: The scope of the Working Group includes profiles of the Enrolment over Secu= re Transport (EST) transported with the Constrained Application Protocol (C= oAP)" Thanks G=F6ran [4] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-coap-est [5] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" > wrote: Hi, I would like to start the charter discussion. Here is a draft of a proposed= charter [1]. It seems to be that additional discussion is needed with regard to the last= paragraph related certificate management. In particular the discussion mig= ht revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair = of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please make this dis= cussion constructive on this thread. The fundamental question is whether we need certificate management at this = stage. If the answer is yes, and we have multiple proposals, it would be go= od to clarify the position of the different proposals and evaluate whether = a selection is needed or not before validating the charter. Please provide your inputs on the mailing list before October 30. Of course= for minor edits, you may suggest them directly on the google doc. Yours, Daniel [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnB= XhoDiptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-interim-2017-ace-03-2017101913= 00/ [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-selander-ace-eals/ -- Daniel Migault Ericsson --_000_AM0PR10MB24188423CC124E1F9333EB50FEEF0AM0PR10MB2418EURP_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Panos, thank you for explaining you position. I understand that you s= upport 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 dra= wback of EST and a pro of CMP having all needed security on the application layer. I do not see, why this should no= t be valid when using CoAP instead of HTTP.

As already pointed out, I do not believe we can address all requireme= nts out there by one certificate enrollment/management protocol.=

 

Important from my perspective is, as Panos also says, there are curre= ntly four votes in favor and only one clear vote against the adoption. Or d= id I miss further votes?

 

Hendrik

 

Von: Ace <ace-bounces@ietf.org> Im A= uftrag von Panos Kampanakis (pkampana)
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. November 2020 04:36
An: G=F6ran Selander <goran.selander=3D40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.= org>; Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>; Ace Wg <ace@ietf.or= g>
Betreff: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion

 

I suppo= rt the addition of draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore in the Charter as it = introduces OSCORE with its advantages in constrained environments for EST w= hich is already standardized in EST-coaps in ACE.

&n= bsp;

As I ha= ve said before, I oppose the addition of CMPv2 over COAP in the charter. Su= mmarizing the reasons here again for brevity:

- we sh= ould not repeat the mistakes of the past and introduce multiple protocols d= oing the same thing (cert enrollment or management) over COAP unless there = is a compelling reason. To answer your other question Daniel, I don’t think we need a new certificate manag= ement protocol at this stage.

- I am = not convinced of the technical advantages of using CMPv2 over COAP in const= rained environments.

- I hav= e not seen overwhelming support for the draft in the list other than Michae= l saying “why not” and Steffen and Hendrik (from Siemens) clear= ly supporting it. Also, minutes from IETF-108 say “DM: Objections to doing this work? No objections registered”.= I was not there to oppose, but I would not call that overwhelming active s= upport either.

- it is= not clear who intends to use and implement the draft. If it is a one or tw= o vendor thing then I don’t think ACE should spend the cycles. I have= not seen many people chiming in that want to the draft and are willing to review.

&n= bsp;

Rgs,

Panos

&n= bsp;

&n= bsp;

From: Ace <ace-bounces@iet= f.org> On Behalf Of G=F6ran Selander
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2020 5:06 AM
To: Daniel Migault <mglt.i= etf@gmail.com>; Ace Wg <ace@ietf.= org>
Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion

 

Hi Daniel, and all,

 

Some comments on the proposed c= harter and your mail, sorry for late response.  

 

1.

”The Working Group is c= harged with maintenance of the framework and existing profiles thereof, and= may undertake work to specify profiles of the framework for additional secure communications protocols”

 

I take it this text covers (sho= uld the WG want to adopt):

 

  • draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile=
  • an ACE-EDHOC profile (i.e. the POST = /token response and the access token provision information to support authe= ntication with EDHOC, e.g. raw public key of the other party). Such a profile could provide good trust management properties, pot= entially at the cost of a larger access token etc.

    •  

    Right?

     

    2.

    ”In particular the discus= sion might revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not c= o-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please make = this discussion constructive on this thread.”

     

    As I remember it, the outcome o= f this discussion was – in line with the mindset of EST – that = it is beneficial to re-use authentication and communication security approp= riate for actual use case. If coaps is suitable for a particular use case, then it makes sense to protect also the enrolme= nt procedure with this protocol. But whereas the security protocol is coaps= instead of https, the enrolment functionality and semantics should reuse t= hat of EST, possibly profiled for the new setting: [4].

     

    In the same spirit there was su= pport at the meeting [2] to specify protection of EST payloads profiled for= use with OSCORE as communication security protocol, together with a suitab= le AKE for authentication. Following the adoption of EDHOC in LAKE this work has now been revived [5]. IMHO the= reasoning above still makes sense.

     

    With this in mind, and taking i= nto account recent discussion on the list, perhaps this part of the charter= :

     

    ”= ;The Working Group will standardize how to use Constrained Application Prot= ocol (CoAP) as a Transport Medium for the Certificate management protocol version 2 (CMPv2).   ”

     

    should be rephrased or compleme= nted with the reasoning above, for example:

     

    The scope of the Working Grou= p includes profiles of the Enrolment over Secure Transport (EST) transporte= d with the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)”

     

    Thanks

    G=F6ran

     

    [4] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-coa= p-est

    [5] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore

     

     

     

     

    On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" <ace-bounces@ietf.org> wrote:<= /span>

    Hi= ,

    I = would like to start the charter discussion. Here is a draft of a proposed c= harter [1].

     

    It= seems to be that additional discussion is needed with regard to the last p= aragraph related certificate management. In particular the discussion might= revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired wo= rk such as [3]. Please make this discussion constructive on this thread.

     

    Th= e fundamental question is whether we need certificate management at this st= age. If the answer is yes, and we have multiple proposals, it would be good= to clarify the position of the different proposals and evaluate whether a selection is needed or not before validat= ing the charter.

     

    Pl= ease provide your inputs on the mailing list before October 30. Of course f= or minor edits, you may suggest them directly on the google doc.=

     

    Yo= urs,

    Da= niel

     

     

    --=

    Da= niel Migault

     

    Er= icsson

--_000_AM0PR10MB24188423CC124E1F9333EB50FEEF0AM0PR10MB2418EURP_-- From nobody Wed Nov 4 10:00:56 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E52543A0EDB for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:00:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, PDS_BTC_ID=0.499, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id psR9OiIAfg2o for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:00:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from NAM11-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm6nam11on2079.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.223.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60DBC3A0E12 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:00:51 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=U3DoORYKsl0lWQ7vTC5rYB3K7EmwyJ1ELWjIW/qjPT+voj4d3gxuZRF1Km6SJPISBPkIXNFC5zJlPdUkrT4JvuZEXClSNeZmpmkUMcrpaRNt5ppid0BuPYy54GDD81WnrHiZcrpuj5IBGRvQPSO0KgIO1hciS2Xp0SXJ0ybKE1SA7iSgrTnVK4JeWF+O8Ah3FebpMnaxhFYqBFB2s/PcRPCMWoFLnnttxR0CKBQU49JGab1whibdgCS4nfUVUadcd8pr5bo9Y1diCyguSreIymTw5N57//Xiy88J3qVMl8yjaejCbb6pTCvoRQZClxo+7JFnJoHVdoNDWVw+4CzY4A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=NHXBOk0T5jOSu+yrlaEBEYru3VDDQF8AHG2kWsh4RNY=; b=SoOTulVdZYhZyhsT1h/dziSxHFD2YUCvyXYMM9vrY74WJio9zbvJurcZBb5txWq9aP03EX5UY3pkcXnyHtOtooj2Havqek/9mwFEjEXI3LLOGFzHYEBla/gH+VykciKDR9i0PPxMucr5ItUgp1WWGc9lj1Vybl/kEdLODWUbVTwgOmCuMJ/AZEvGNIhuamAbzrtaJKwaJMD8SCbRu+ubRyWG7LtY+q8Q8Y6atnR09MLaDKsV203LHV3NWoolxWwJB9bkzK2RHDq3hLWuPQV/+6HaOPCCRUlohEJEKngcibjjcZB8+ne2UixtDNsyNuG/S2eWi5qS+sk3V3Sn0n6E/w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=NHXBOk0T5jOSu+yrlaEBEYru3VDDQF8AHG2kWsh4RNY=; b=P/81ufW5OHkYlPJBM7SZ56iDQQGuJM83C5oaykFedXloCz4qOlE3GyTRioj+Sa8kT5+/kq63KWWX3xSX52OfBSSPRSKz1I/S2/GXgAdvJaiwRpoEN61cjO7n1xWjVK6BUrzAMWIhG0B7o4fB6BUxiRYO5wRxlHFYt+KSRiV4VdQ= Received: from DM6PR15MB2379.namprd15.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:8a::16) by DM6PR15MB3943.namprd15.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:2bf::15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3499.19; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 18:00:47 +0000 Received: from DM6PR15MB2379.namprd15.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::28b4:8429:419b:15b0]) by DM6PR15MB2379.namprd15.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::28b4:8429:419b:15b0%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3499.032; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 18:00:47 +0000 From: Daniel Migault To: "Brockhaus, Hendrik" , Ace Wg , "Panos Kampanakis (pkampana)" CC: =?Windows-1252?Q?G=F6ran_Selander?= , Daniel Migault Thread-Topic: [Ace] Charter discussion Thread-Index: AQHWoxud03r8WJLv1EWdAkJ4mJrIXKm2S5EAgAElX4CAAOt0AIAABai0 Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 18:00:47 +0000 Message-ID: References: , In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: msip_labels: MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_Enabled=true; MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_SetDate=2020-11-04T17:38:27Z; MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_Method=Standard; MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_Name=restricted-default; MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_SiteId=38ae3bcd-9579-4fd4-adda-b42e1495d55a; MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_ActionId=0f00faf7-57af-42d5-adb4-13a82fe72761; MSIP_Label_a59b6cd5-d141-4a33-8bf1-0ca04484304f_ContentBits=0; authentication-results: siemens.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;siemens.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com; x-originating-ip: [96.22.11.129] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 4677d1e6-cbdc-4af6-171b-08d880eb8efa x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR15MB3943: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: KBllGGLhzonqtAncph1ACSYuXJPXXZFEjuIH+R1MgGlI2cV2+XRM4RoIprljxyy0NTnITL3sjmvQV93fBY8Uk90bBi1Tsc0DyiUKH2hvSjva3GfUKfvwjGmlo0+S+LIeHyYAUiBqhPqWfXx4dTZzOpTypT/TLYuQpn3Tzd+K50hU8zr2I6blppcM/+hC/Dk/o5pr2MrYt66wkt7nxQLmIOugVFC1LuUybjg0nXgSi+9aGdGJIBcYblTlREmhNaClBgJwP9EVmY6k4v1Nu5/qiowQncjkUngDGPUAJZmNvKZ0+2boXXm1AlYvuh8p+Wdk08B4M+kBl7PtSKtyQ9YnVlIPBi4s94pmH6PEYV6TPeJ37oZjWCM/wVEPRmIsrJOPvosTeJrc/DK0i+NIyCFj/A== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:DM6PR15MB2379.namprd15.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(396003)(39860400002)(136003)(346002)(376002)(366004)(5660300002)(83380400001)(966005)(71200400001)(186003)(316002)(8936002)(166002)(8676002)(55016002)(19627235002)(9686003)(19627405001)(478600001)(66574015)(54906003)(110136005)(64756008)(66446008)(66476007)(4326008)(76116006)(7696005)(53546011)(6506007)(4001150100001)(33656002)(86362001)(52536014)(26005)(2906002)(66946007)(44832011)(66556008)(91956017); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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 x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DM6PR15MB237916F4265FBF699A3978CDE3EF0DM6PR15MB2379namp_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DM6PR15MB2379.namprd15.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 4677d1e6-cbdc-4af6-171b-08d880eb8efa X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Nov 2020 18:00:47.5940 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: KBVGs9zfihu77nRw6OtGIM6RjZoLB9M52vt76ioOuu1hrzQKo/XxTA8lbRLvim54dvOVwJC0mm3lRgyYiP+dke5TEHbQMqaqdcRHdoh6WRE= X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR15MB3943 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 18:00:55 -0000 --_000_DM6PR15MB237916F4265FBF699A3978CDE3EF0DM6PR15MB2379namp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just one clarification adoption is not based on vote, but a common understa= nding this is useful. Yours, Daniel ________________________________ From: Ace on behalf of Brockhaus, Hendrik Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2020 12:38 PM To: Ace Wg ; Panos Kampanakis (pkampana) Cc: G=F6ran Selander ; Dani= el Migault Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion 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 handsh= ake as a pro of EST, I see in many environments exactly this as a drawback = of EST and a pro of CMP having all needed security on the application layer= . I do not see, why this should not be valid when using CoAP instead of HTT= P. As already pointed out, I do not believe we can address all requirements ou= t there by one certificate enrollment/management protocol. Important from my perspective is, as Panos also says, there are currently f= our votes in favor and only one clear vote against the adoption. Or did I m= iss further votes? Hendrik Von: Ace Im Auftrag von Panos Kampanakis (pkampana) Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. November 2020 04:36 An: G=F6ran Selander ; Dani= el Migault ; Ace Wg Betreff: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion I support the addition of draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore in the Charter= as it introduces OSCORE with its advantages in constrained environments fo= r EST which is already standardized in EST-coaps in ACE. As I have said before, I oppose the addition of CMPv2 over COAP in the char= ter. Summarizing the reasons here again for brevity: - we should not repeat the mistakes of the past and introduce multiple prot= ocols doing the same thing (cert enrollment or management) over COAP unless= there is a compelling reason. To answer your other question Daniel, I don= =92t think we need a new certificate management protocol at this stage. - I am not convinced of the technical advantages of using CMPv2 over COAP i= n constrained environments. - I have not seen overwhelming support for the draft in the list other than= Michael saying =93why not=94 and Steffen and Hendrik (from Siemens) clearl= y supporting it. Also, minutes from IETF-108 say =93DM: Objections to doing= this work? No objections registered=94. I was not there to oppose, but I w= ould not call that overwhelming active support either. - it is not clear who intends to use and implement the draft. If it is a on= e or two vendor thing then I don=92t think ACE should spend the cycles. I h= ave not seen many people chiming in that want to the draft and are willing = to review. Rgs, Panos From: Ace > On Behalf Of = G=F6ran Selander Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2020 5:06 AM To: Daniel Migault >; Ace W= g > Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion Hi Daniel, and all, Some comments on the proposed charter and your mail, sorry for late respons= e. 1. =94The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and exist= ing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of the fra= mework for additional secure communications protocols=94 I take it this text covers (should the WG want to adopt): * draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile * an ACE-EDHOC profile (i.e. the POST /token response and the access to= ken provision information to support authentication with EDHOC, e.g. raw pu= blic key of the other party). Such a profile could provide good trust manag= ement properties, potentially at the cost of a larger access token etc. Right? 2. =94In particular the discussion might revive a discussion that happened in = 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired wor= k such as [3]. Please make this discussion constructive on this thread.=94 As I remember it, the outcome of this discussion was =96 in line with the m= indset of EST =96 that it is beneficial to re-use authentication and commun= ication security appropriate for actual use case. If coaps is suitable for = a particular use case, then it makes sense to protect also the enrolment pr= ocedure with this protocol. But whereas the security protocol is coaps inst= ead of https, the enrolment functionality and semantics should reuse that o= f EST, possibly profiled for the new setting: [4]. In the same spirit there was support at the meeting [2] to specify protecti= on of EST payloads profiled for use with OSCORE as communication security p= rotocol, together with a suitable AKE for authentication. Following the ado= ption of EDHOC in LAKE this work has now been revived [5]. IMHO the reasoni= ng above still makes sense. With this in mind, and taking into account recent discussion on the list, p= erhaps this part of the charter: =94The Working Group will standardize how to use Constrained Application Pr= otocol (CoAP) as a Transport Medium for the Certificate management protocol= version 2 (CMPv2). =94 should be rephrased or complemented with the reasoning above, for example: The scope of the Working Group includes profiles of the Enrolment over Secu= re Transport (EST) transported with the Constrained Application Protocol (C= oAP)=94 Thanks G=F6ran [4] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-coap-est [5] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" > wrote: Hi, I would like to start the charter discussion. Here is a draft of a proposed= charter [1]. It seems to be that additional discussion is needed with regard to the last= paragraph related certificate management. In particular the discussion mig= ht revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair = of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please make this dis= cussion constructive on this thread. The fundamental question is whether we need certificate management at this = stage. If the answer is yes, and we have multiple proposals, it would be go= od to clarify the position of the different proposals and evaluate whether = a selection is needed or not before validating the charter. Please provide your inputs on the mailing list before October 30. Of course= for minor edits, you may suggest them directly on the google doc. Yours, Daniel [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnB= XhoDiptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-interim-2017-ace-03-2017101913= 00/ [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-selander-ace-eals/ -- Daniel Migault Ericsson --_000_DM6PR15MB237916F4265FBF699A3978CDE3EF0DM6PR15MB2379namp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Just one clarification adoption is not based on vote, but a common understa= nding this is useful. 

Yours, 
Daniel
From: Ace <ace-bounces@i= etf.org> on behalf of Brockhaus, Hendrik <hendrik.brockhaus@siemens.c= om>
Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2020 12:38 PM
To: Ace Wg <ace@ietf.org>; Panos Kampanakis (pkampana) <pka= mpana@cisco.com>
Cc: G=F6ran Selander <goran.selander=3D40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.= org>; Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion
 

Panos, thank you f= or explaining you position. I understand that you support EST. I already ex= pressed my position and arguments in favor of CMP. :-)

As you see the aut= hentication provided by binding the CSR to the TLS handshake as a pro of ES= T, I see in many environments exactly this as a drawback of EST and a pro o= f CMP having all needed security on the application layer. I do not see, why this should not be valid when using C= oAP instead of HTTP.

As already pointed= out, I do not believe we can address all requirements out there by one cer= tificate enrollment/management protocol.

 

Important from my = perspective is, as Panos also says, there are currently four votes in favor= and only one clear vote against the adoption. Or did I miss further votes?=

 

Hendrik

 

Von: Ace <ace-bounces@ietf.org> Im= Auftrag von Panos Kampanakis (pkampana)
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. November 2020 04:36
An: G=F6ran Selander <goran.selander=3D40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.= org>; Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>; Ace Wg <ace@ietf.or= g>
Betreff: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion

 

I sup= port the addition of draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore in the Charter as i= t introduces OSCORE with its advantages in constrained environments for EST= which is already standardized in EST-coaps in ACE.

 = ;

As I = have said before, I oppose the addition of CMPv2 over COAP in the charter. = Summarizing the reasons here again for brevity:

- we = should not repeat the mistakes of the past and introduce multiple protocols= doing the same thing (cert enrollment or management) over COAP unless ther= e is a compelling reason. To answer your other question Daniel, I don=92t think we need a new certificate managemen= t protocol at this stage.

- I a= m not convinced of the technical advantages of using CMPv2 over COAP in con= strained environments.

- I h= ave not seen overwhelming support for the draft in the list other than Mich= ael saying =93why not=94 and Steffen and Hendrik (from Siemens) clearly sup= porting it. Also, minutes from IETF-108 say =93DM: Objections to doing this work? No objections registered=94. I was n= ot there to oppose, but I would not call that overwhelming active support e= ither.

- it = is not clear who intends to use and implement the draft. If it is a one or = two vendor thing then I don=92t think ACE should spend the cycles. I have n= ot seen many people chiming in that want to the draft and are willing to review.

 = ;

Rgs,<= /span>

Panos=

 = ;

 = ;

From: Ace <ace-bounces@iet= f.org> On Behalf Of G=F6ran Selander
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2020 5:06 AM
To: Daniel Migault <mglt.i= etf@gmail.com>; Ace Wg <ace@ietf.= org>
Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion

 

Hi Daniel, and all,

 

Some comments on the proposed= charter and your mail, sorry for late response.  

 

1.

=94The Working Group is c= harged with maintenance of the framework and existing profiles thereof, and= may undertake work to specify profiles of the framework for additional secure communications protocols=94

 

I take it this text covers (s= hould the WG want to adopt):

 

  • draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile<= /li>
  • an ACE-EDHOC profile (i.e. the POST /toke= n response and the access token provision information to support authentica= tion with EDHOC, e.g. raw public key of the other party). Such a profile could provide good trust management propertie= s, potentially at the cost of a larger access token etc.

 

Right?

 

2.

=94In particular the discussi= on might revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-= chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please make th= is discussion constructive on this thread.=94

 

As I remember it, the outcome= of this discussion was =96 in line with the mindset of EST =96 that it is = beneficial to re-use authentication and communication security appropriate = for actual use case. If coaps is suitable for a particular use case, then it makes sense to protect also the enrolme= nt procedure with this protocol. But whereas the security protocol is coaps= instead of https, the enrolment functionality and semantics should reuse t= hat of EST, possibly profiled for the new setting: [4].

 

In the same spirit there was = support at the meeting [2] to specify protection of EST payloads profiled f= or use with OSCORE as communication security protocol, together with a suit= able AKE for authentication. Following the adoption of EDHOC in LAKE this work has now been revived [5]. IMHO the= reasoning above still makes sense.

 

With this in mind, and taking= into account recent discussion on the list, perhaps this part of the chart= er:

 

= =94The Working Group will standardize how to use Constrained Application Pr= otocol (CoAP) as a Transport Medium for the Certificate management protocol version 2 (CMPv2).   =94

 

should be rephrased or comple= mented with the reasoning above, for example:

 

The scope of the Working = Group includes profiles of the Enrolment over Secure Transport (EST) transp= orted with the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)=94

 

Thanks

G=F6ran

 

[4] = https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-coap-est<= /span>

[5] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore

 

 

 

 

On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" <ace-bounces@ietf.org> wrote:

= Hi,

= I would like to start the charter discussion. Here is a draft of a proposed= charter [1].

=  

= It seems to be that additional discussion is needed with regard to the last= paragraph related certificate management. In particular the discussion mig= ht revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired wo= rk such as [3]. Please make this discussion constructive on this thread.

=  

= The fundamental question is whether we need certificate management at this = stage. If the answer is yes, and we have multiple proposals, it would be go= od to clarify the position of the different proposals and evaluate whether a selection is needed or not before validat= ing the charter.

=  

= Please provide your inputs on the mailing list before October 30. Of course= for minor edits, you may suggest them directly on the google doc.

=  

= Yours,

= Daniel

=  

=  

= --

= Daniel Migault

=  

= Ericsson

--_000_DM6PR15MB237916F4265FBF699A3978CDE3EF0DM6PR15MB2379namp_-- From nobody Fri Nov 6 00:08:44 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 922203A0DA5 for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:08:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ri.se Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PkoMkJu-NTRG for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:08:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from EUR01-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr130044.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.13.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 748243A0CBA for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:08:39 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=KOjiXfSjtfY5IhYedkOAcm05A80hM0nNjzYDXixMN5C2bkggFl1gpTWi6qCmyoreDhr/wq4E4eEFRR7cbbI7kies9EAQvU6Q+BboM41XHFjX6swfen1y8rMscNd5uI2fOmdDE75xuMlt1Su5z0yyXUAQjdQ6dunysqcVaa48Gpd7AaLki2uYRKPvgdgSo03Gw48lzp66T4rNfa+ig6vn6xWr7k2PuR5plpKO4PXibi3qCT4R6Sbf3dRCGnpreJ/5+KqrBuAS3sVqLKR0Yr6T40HK9CgCl8ojmwqEU0xK83uqiiFDn6c947sm/eUAI9fhwKCgGdqGqi6jkRSEWrAIjg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=c943VuXbdwyBCMrVImpMoqrZEYSUs47i/x2EFHq3loI=; b=UZw//p8Q+O1Wu8bTczXBCHw/YYJMDKMiC9XlrDzj70cn80Xa2kY4n2hixU7+rg7AlNA/15Op9oAufS+CVbC6K/HYbIV2zzcByWAE0IDWrA27NkEd5qHgKT7ZNF3uTLkVnlojQoJM1WfwamOQOaleY7LdF8+b6we7WzS47kzRC2E6A7Osj8puQ0IMekztLyFTTqVDO4MsUiSrvg6AtkZofQLmeSyGZk8AE9+cgbgiYW8DW/tM49oeDHIiEth0Tp2J2Q7yyyqsZKmo4Q3dqa8ywsQKycSW6/My2uQJ6fXToZ42rvYVVfC8eMlVZzJAp7j5EObd6ks2LmZGoPk66ypELw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ri.se; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ri.se; dkim=pass header.d=ri.se; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ri.se; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=c943VuXbdwyBCMrVImpMoqrZEYSUs47i/x2EFHq3loI=; b=Zu0titEkroRw6ooeWuksfMgmdfQ7WWjf/wHNTtnEpoonHPLn2eamq3lvGxVUBmIoztnujn2XQzFH3GqqbcJB4TbR1tR/tswoAVAiAGxjlIsWzLpFy1MNgBj4yN0ZdCfNj8e2pTgAS2cmIf1KUy2zwSqyUoikeIy1UpbiQeYgO5g= Authentication-Results: ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ri.se; Received: from DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:10:16e::14) by DB8P189MB1047.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:10:14b::13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3541.21; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 08:08:36 +0000 Received: from DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::c906:d500:5041:56fd]) by DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::c906:d500:5041:56fd%9]) with mapi id 15.20.3541.022; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 08:08:36 +0000 References: <160433851333.25365.11567584336781130433@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Ace Wg From: Marco Tiloca Autocrypt: addr=marco.tiloca@ri.se; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQENBFSNeRUBCAC44iazWzj/PE3TiAlBsaWna0JbdIAJFHB8PLrqthI0ZG7GnCLNR8ZhDz6Z aRDPC4FR3UcMhPgZpJIqa6Zi8yWYCqF7A7QhT7E1WdQR1G0+6xUEd0ZD+QBdf29pQadrVZAt 0G4CkUnq5H+Sm05aw2Cpv3JfsATVaemWmujnMTvZ3dFudCGNdsY6kPSVzMRyedX7ArLXyF+0 Kh1T4WUW6NHfEWltnzkcqRhn2NcZtADsxWrMBgZXkLE/dP67SnyFjWYpz7aNpxxA+mb5WBT+ NrSetJlljT0QOXrXMGh98GLfNnLAl6gJryE6MZazN5oxkJgkAep8SevFXzglj7CAsh4PABEB AAG0Nk1hcmNvIFRpbG9jYSAobWFyY28udGlsb2NhQHJpLnNlKSA8bWFyY28udGlsb2NhQHJp LnNlPokBNwQTAQgAIQUCWkAnkAIbAwULCQgHAgYVCAkKCwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAAKCRDuJmS0 DljaQwEvCACJKPJIPGH0oGnLJY4G1I2DgNiyVKt1H4kkc/eT8Bz9OSbAxgZo3Jky382e4Dba ayWrQRFen0aLSFuzbU4BX4O/YRSaIqUO3KwUNO1iTC65OHz0XirGohPUOsc0SEMtpm+4zfYG 7G8p35MK0h9gpwgGMG0j0mZX4RDjuywC88i1VxCwMWGaZRlUrPXkC3nqDDRcPtuEGpncWhAV Qt2ZqeyITv9KCUmDntmXLPe6vEXtOfI9Z3HeqeI8OkGwXpotVobgLa/mVmFj6EALDzj7HC2u tfgxECBJddmcDInrvGgTkZtXEVbyLQuiK20lJmYnmPWN8DXaVVaQ4XP/lXUrzoEzuQENBFSN eRUBCACWmp+k6LkY4/ey7eA7umYVc22iyVqAEXmywDYzEjewYwRcjTrH/Nx1EqwjIDuW+BBE oMLRZOHCgmjo6HRmWIutcYVCt9ieokultkor9BBoQVPiI+Tp51Op02ifkGcrEQNZi7q3fmOt hFZwZ6NJnUbA2bycaKZ8oClvDCQj6AjEydBPnS73UaEoDsqsGVjZwChfOMg5OyFm90QjpIw8 m0uDVcCzKKfxq3T/z7tyRgucIUe84EzBuuJBESEjK/hF0nR2LDh1ShD29FWrFZSNVVCVu1UY ZLAayf8oKKHHpM+whfjEYO4XsDpV4zQ15A+D15HRiHR6Adf4PDtPM1DCwggjABEBAAGJAR8E GAECAAkFAlSNeRUCGwwACgkQ7iZktA5Y2kPGEwf/WNjTy3z74vLmHycVsFXXoQ8W1+858mRy Ad0a8JYzY3xB7CVtqI3Hy894Qcw4H6G799A1OL9B1EeA8Yj3aOz0NbUyf5GW+iotr3h8+KIC OYZ34/BQaOLzdvDNmRoGHn+NeTzhF7eSeiPKi2jex+NVodhjOVGXw8EhYGkeZLvynHEboiLM 4TbyPbVR9HsdVqKGVTDxKSE3namo3kvtY6syRFIiUz5WzJfYAuqbt6m3TxDEb8sA9pzaLuhm fnJRc12H5NVZEZmE/EkJFTlkP4wnZyOSf/r2/Vd0iHauBwv57cpY6HFFMe7rvK4s7ME5zctO Ely5C6NCu1ZaNtdUuqDSPA== X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <160433851333.25365.11567584336781130433@ietfa.amsl.com> Message-ID: <1efe700c-4d14-5920-e0b0-a7bd63880ad1@ri.se> Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:08:27 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 In-Reply-To: <160433851333.25365.11567584336781130433@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Yie3zCPZoltP7VyBnYW1RKXq68oe8eoLz" X-Originating-IP: [45.12.220.244] X-ClientProxiedBy: HE1PR07CA0018.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:67::28) To DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:10:16e::14) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from [10.8.1.4] (45.12.220.244) by HE1PR07CA0018.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:67::28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3541.10 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 08:08:36 +0000 X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: e7ca85c6-4ad7-4ed6-9f9d-08d8822b2973 X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: DB8P189MB1047: X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:9508; X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1 X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: QL86uELZ0Jlvj7ITn9uXoHV2xlDXUtl+Kk55BCXl7pVyVsODfJuvRelsfx9kgtjqWrPDmOFiZy6ZaNRqEhtqoWBVewvivxxnL/G2gL8dLKQD0N2R2G8W9Flqg+b1VrtXuVdHDNKlhCHZL2fGoKvKIk0svwVDTmfPJiJg3HSxioxEq2JhmA2X+72cmU+wA1445wW157RZJYI8JTYSbHQH3NxCXcRrt0x3ggf6TGhbA5JZCh+kO/mpdD57qaLYtq7bN/h9R67IaA/VP7pZPRYIuukyISHcK/aM1QivlC4slqlKksBpB3Job4df+4+TjBcE1oltrTAKa5mvAB+3YbGWY2Kjx+4IHIyWTjRZE7+lbi6KAAV7gypj41rnwHUVbqrOGfWMtLD1QNL6czB5X5VMzKiBaCXb7ALIXMENC6ShyinvK52Rhxz7HZcgop7HGyccl/kSxyxH82VFkCAAcHUL3w== X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(366004)(39850400004)(136003)(396003)(346002)(376002)(16576012)(44832011)(6916009)(966005)(45080400002)(316002)(86362001)(6666004)(8676002)(2616005)(956004)(52116002)(478600001)(33964004)(31696002)(26005)(83380400001)(21480400003)(8936002)(66946007)(66556008)(66476007)(166002)(15650500001)(66574015)(6486002)(186003)(36756003)(5660300002)(235185007)(2906002)(16526019)(31686004)(43740500002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData: 394l5/v4oNr9yOJzTaJeBEOSxCQAKzHWgBkr77BdJMxoB+nU8qtNDZjNE41EZD4Ojtmz4332zLdmkYH9S4iPM1IGrheBCbAYPBLDSA75u+4SOaxn95pMRKvxyjYIOhkaiyTosgzHc6zLavmAVnlSBSlConX+ZisEG0+KnY0RYTkOzUeavE6hpi0Qfij9bQQ5E09eyUdPZfGMcOX/NP+5B2mXJ1Vvb3iCHeZ/fPPoxqH3pI+tqaGcda/VT108vTj7OxdKSFgjEFnwIR8XxxvWefWIe9PxkueraNfJI9n9YZg5JdCCmcgk+8D9FxZO92OjI4ILRw54CajB976DiMdbS7huTClFMREVRporb5VuV1Vil9Fv1ER5uVqjhBX5AARbOD/IrdX3qclE636/VGBWm+EX//CTUvAwDXRR9ndzZ9g/Wbh/JPFSSeZLqLyrROvu/qkiwKqwD5z9EjMaw+hgcAKBUZPV1aGyQ43Zo6dCmyO9g0OYMwVLI4qxlK65B5d9rLCv84AhpCm+xIxcg84QbHz0F/xwz4+mKhhqg0BbEKlIM0r+pN9SxWLPiKF3fGh3w3JWtlpWm+qNWSdlpQudYcK6f6oD/m42aSIfMfeN4n/ezMb9G6PndZdPpkqbUcqN6B0FQi2Qre4WGR08WJtR6wU21VsQjNaSRPrJM9gzxQjx7uwzczdCvwebPiu8vEt13TMsP76FlSHCczhHpcZIhAJoXeEJeqDuIhXgL01qVyuv15JnNaZ7sd9jis1hPDUFPAfMJvuxpsJA6Ihwt9U/QAVRTn67gvH/eqqVboO545dEvTq64wMgqozRPDfaBqRoxiV6qoBXqBniQVNg1DOftPDuz3WdJKDH48PzIdStYQtvxSRUIudHai0l2lU38E/GEa5k+1pEv1jD84FubAQ1mg== X-OriginatorOrg: ri.se X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: e7ca85c6-4ad7-4ed6-9f9d-08d8822b2973 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Nov 2020 08:08:36.6679 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 5a9809cf-0bcb-413a-838a-09ecc40cc9e8 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: CwIQlLWLZ0HRgPhc/wMGcbyMxaTRrOmkTp5S+RYhjgOJ/Vr/Il/ZXoOwHjZ2hjWR/TjQHID+IafZMh/1a5filA== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB8P189MB1047 Archived-At: Subject: [Ace] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification-03.txt X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 08:08:44 -0000 --Yie3zCPZoltP7VyBnYW1RKXq68oe8eoLz Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="s5k1gvZpTx95GGViONOts7E73SOla634y" --s5k1gvZpTx95GGViONOts7E73SOla634y Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------3FC4156AE737AEBB0BD81361" Content-Language: en-US This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------3FC4156AE737AEBB0BD81361 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello ACE, We have recently submitted an updated version of draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification-0= 3 The document describes how an Authorization Server can notify Clients and Resource Servers of revoked but yet not expired Access Tokens. This is achieved by means of a Token Revocation List (TRL) resource at the AS, that a device can access and observe by using resource observation for CoAP. The approach complements token introspection at the AS, and does not require additional endpoints on Clients and Resource Servers. This version further builds on the major update in version -02, and is especially about: 1) Providing an additional circumstance by which Access Tokens can be revoked. 2) Making more explicit examples of Token Hash computing. 3) Two additional interaction examples, also using the Diff Query mode. Comments are very welcome! Best, /Marco -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification-03.txt Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 09:35:13 -0800 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Grace Lewis , Francesca Palombini , Ludwig Seitz , Marco Tiloca , Sebastian Echeverria A new version of I-D, draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification-03.txt has been successfully submitted by Marco Tiloca and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification Revision: 03 Title: Notification of Revoked Access Tokens in the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments (ACE) Framework Document date: 2020-11-02 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 28 URL: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.i= etf.org%2Farchive%2Fid%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification-03.t= xt&data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C638abc7c07334b828f5b08d87f= 55a9a3%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399353636077617%7C= Unknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWw= iLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=3DKYWBu49HnAb7MHodW4P6FdGfOhNO1781ZigtBR= Lli3I%3D&reserved=3D0 Status: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fdatat= racker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification%2F&am= p;data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C638abc7c07334b828f5b08d87f55a9a= 3%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399353636077617%7CUnkno= wn%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJX= VCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=3D35xTqmNIguGC5pEYgDvOZod2e5Ra6BWxARG8VWyVyLc= %3D&reserved=3D0 Htmlized: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fdatat= racker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notificatio= n&data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C638abc7c07334b828f5b08d87f5= 5a9a3%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399353636077617%7CU= nknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwi= LCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=3DsgMAyR%2B9hbq5DWo%2FsYwU5P4oRfCzfOfVbqA= XDBoidlU%3D&reserved=3D0 Htmlized: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Ftools= =2Eietf.org%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification-03&d= ata=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C638abc7c07334b828f5b08d87f55a9a3%7= C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399353636077617%7CUnknown%= 7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI= 6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=3DoPLO%2Fqcifo0naSk7reIwHsy%2FEHzH2gRhdXOrSKmF%2= BNs%3D&reserved=3D0 Diff: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.i= etf.org%2Frfcdiff%3Furl2%3Ddraft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification-03= &data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C638abc7c07334b828f5b08d87f55= a9a3%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399353636077617%7CUn= known%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiL= CJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=3Dg1jRVH03W93dFxE49yD%2FK9dB0oNevtiWMrgrYw= kF%2FzI%3D&reserved=3D0 Abstract: This document specifies a method of the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments (ACE) framework, which allows an Authorization Server to notify Clients and Resource Servers (i.e., registered devices) about revoked Access Tokens. The method relies on resource observation for the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP), with Clients and Resource Servers observing a Token Revocation List on the Authorization Server. Resulting unsolicited notifications of revoked Access Tokens complement alternative approaches such as token introspection, while not requiring additional endpoints on Clients and Resource Servers. Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submiss= ion until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. The IETF Secretariat --------------3FC4156AE737AEBB0BD81361 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello ACE,

We have recently submitted an updated version of draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification

https://tools.ietf.org/html= /draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification-03

The document describes how an Authorization Server can notify Clients and Resource Servers of revoked but yet not expired Access Tokens. This is achieved by means of a Token Revocation List (TRL) resource at the AS, that a device can access and observe by using resource observation for CoAP. The approach complements token introspection at the AS, and does not require additional endpoints on Clients and Resource Servers.

This version further builds on the major update in version -02, and is especially about:

1) Providing an additional circumstance by which Access Tokens can be revoked.

2) Making more explicit examples of Token Hash computing.

3) Two additional interaction examples, also using the Diff Query mode.


Comments are very welcome!

Best,
/Marco


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Sub= ject: New Version Notification for draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification-03.txt
Dat= e: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 09:35:13 -0800
Fro= m: internet-drafts@ietf.org
To:= Grace Lewis <glewis@sei.cmu.edu>, Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@ericsson.com&g= t;, Ludwig Seitz <ludwig.seitz@combitech.se>, Marco Tilo= ca <marco.tiloca@ri.se>, Sebastian Echeverria <secheverria@sei.cmu.edu>



A new version of I-D, draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification-03.txt
has been successfully submitted by Marco Tiloca and posted to the IETF repository.

Name: draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification
Revision: 03
Title: Notification of Revoked Access Tokens in the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments (ACE) Framework
Document date: 2020-11-02
Group: Individual Submission
Pages: 28
URL: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2= F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Farchive%2Fid%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notifica= tion-03.txt&amp;data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C638abc7c07334= b828f5b08d87f55a9a3%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C63739935= 3636077617%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLC= JBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&amp;sdata=3DKYWBu49HnAb7MHodW4P6F= dGfOhNO1781ZigtBRLli3I%3D&amp;reserved=3D0
Status: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fda= tatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification%2F= &amp;data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C638abc7c07334b828f5b08d8= 7f55a9a3%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399353636077617%= 7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1ha= WwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&amp;sdata=3D35xTqmNIguGC5pEYgDvOZod2e5Ra6BWx= ARG8VWyVyLc%3D&amp;reserved=3D0
Htmlized: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3= A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token= -notification&amp;data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C638abc7c073= 34b828f5b08d87f55a9a3%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399= 353636077617%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIi= LCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&amp;sdata=3DsgMAyR%2B9hbq5DWo%2= FsYwU5P4oRfCzfOfVbqAXDBoidlU%3D&amp;reserved=3D0
Htmlized: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fto= ols.ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification-03&= amp;data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C638abc7c07334b828f5b08d87f55a= 9a3%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399353636077617%7CUnk= nown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLC= JXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&amp;sdata=3DoPLO%2Fqcifo0naSk7reIwHsy%2FEHzH2gRhd= XOrSKmF%2BNs%3D&amp;reserved=3D0
Diff: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A= %2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Frfcdiff%3Furl2%3Ddraft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-noti= fication-03&amp;data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C638abc7c07334= b828f5b08d87f55a9a3%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C63739935= 3636077617%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLC= JBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&amp;sdata=3Dg1jRVH03W93dFxE49yD%2= FK9dB0oNevtiWMrgrYwkF%2FzI%3D&amp;reserved=3D0

Abstract:
This document specifies a method of the Authentication and
Authorization for Constrained Environments (ACE) framework, which allows an Authorization Server to notify Clients and Resource Servers
(i.e., registered devices) about revoked Access Tokens. The method<= br> relies on resource observation for the Constrained Application
Protocol (CoAP), with Clients and Resource Servers observing a Token
Revocation List on the Authorization Server. Resulting unsolicited<= br> notifications of revoked Access Tokens complement alternative
approaches such as token introspection, while not requiring
additional endpoints on Clients and Resource Servers.



Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat


--------------3FC4156AE737AEBB0BD81361-- --s5k1gvZpTx95GGViONOts7E73SOla634y-- --Yie3zCPZoltP7VyBnYW1RKXq68oe8eoLz Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEOEo4cV326Z7GypVg7iZktA5Y2kMFAl+lBHsACgkQ7iZktA5Y 2kPzeAf/ajI1M4c6LSKBJpXsuj9shenKmI8QN2dng+H7Fh5BZWIbJkFV2twCgSXv 1mjTXiE0+c/OjRFWpAoiu3sraUf8LkqXHhCg+QFkPCyov04y1/Z8UQmYAeyeU/wZ 9nW1Jup0fLooJfdaslokvaRAqXZkOiDREIdnbrx3Jiv1JUAkb/GoWsmgHf5n6s1w KJ7sbuE0OHQSDhH+i64n4yotqpzNtzHQZGe/5VXH0xLCC8SN2A2CDpaotyA2Nn7F 4x9LKNU7fWAdnF3jesUcJwnznC21F6N+3vFCMVT3kFbxqo5JIwEXozPT+52iX7Mh XKCDW9Xc1Iyrv04MDCovDP3F0ELG5g== =yduP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Yie3zCPZoltP7VyBnYW1RKXq68oe8eoLz-- From nobody Fri Nov 6 00:10:13 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6123E3A0E7C for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:10:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ri.se Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1QH6iHq-vTVJ for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:10:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from EUR01-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr130083.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.13.83]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4320D3A0E76 for ; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 00:10:07 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=gI8Tufv/++aOVKWtmEy6WWUrJDXS3RAW//pa8PHRHOE8iyKxaWjYu1S6k1zbpvkzmcGcHcsstD7cEvULotWT3S0Fy4o8BgecXUqepj3XXMQy+/wbYlyi78jQE5YjGiCf3qCpBxDpaAwE27TO6aTYek0UhHJAXisxEudAFmIj7fjnMW2PgRvECtcaQrSt+oEmGV/paclVX4Xx8KhzISdyuEX+AJ2OJkzlAkEjkAcVL+DMwSrDhZkhDjc3mc1UhSQ3d02Dnc7ZoDG5F5CiajUOJvXQjMCvzUbz4jVH1d7NAVP5R18eSfECES6nSU2KqTr7KnnGAED26T8hkRTI4XYoBw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=fJCjuoV7O96932qZfSzQK7tcjlmxVqssi0W8dQ6V2ww=; b=RFHRIqxpZEKYTqpsJL966ejwYUFRbC9aKbcDLyGbCeiM9HVLTOjP1k8OHVrgMmfsISDB9fDcLaXQ2aAcu7fixLroNLRKx4R2N2M+5wkQdoEjZRHvNlq0qnT0TrfBrGozMRPpD8O1tNm6oiZM/XKYtp7eMTM02k4mrY5vkUQr+AELPiNX8SVpe1KUwg+vTOwfElRHKRAmtDcoUseesPfm6z2vr03lxWPBF5voP7SohfGhHRMqPJvtSoccYXrhBPyBubdWClFkFtWiM5ZtCa5Igy5gUWZLK22XdGeQrMCogF7prUjipnQGGW4pc3EsqIc5vX7Sp7fJL4MnflFYoimcmg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ri.se; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ri.se; dkim=pass header.d=ri.se; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ri.se; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=fJCjuoV7O96932qZfSzQK7tcjlmxVqssi0W8dQ6V2ww=; b=iNbIb5WA6gpxuGkmZhuuvJNBLSwSVcbBhSuhK0fZKctVTWn8x0DDfqNKx8ELj6KHTZl0zDhuKMV45Ux4UKSK4BKQDOzWOA4VaMi2bdUico4uJqg1JNCU7ELleiYPtwSS07YkgoLgTpquCmLEwEfQN6fONLc7p0E5911Azwq+iSI= Authentication-Results: ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ri.se; Received: from DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:10:16e::14) by DB8P189MB1047.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:10:14b::13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3541.21; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 08:10:04 +0000 Received: from DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::c906:d500:5041:56fd]) by DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::c906:d500:5041:56fd%9]) with mapi id 15.20.3541.022; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 08:10:03 +0000 References: <160433581829.22846.13265405336502302804@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Ace Wg From: Marco Tiloca Autocrypt: addr=marco.tiloca@ri.se; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQENBFSNeRUBCAC44iazWzj/PE3TiAlBsaWna0JbdIAJFHB8PLrqthI0ZG7GnCLNR8ZhDz6Z aRDPC4FR3UcMhPgZpJIqa6Zi8yWYCqF7A7QhT7E1WdQR1G0+6xUEd0ZD+QBdf29pQadrVZAt 0G4CkUnq5H+Sm05aw2Cpv3JfsATVaemWmujnMTvZ3dFudCGNdsY6kPSVzMRyedX7ArLXyF+0 Kh1T4WUW6NHfEWltnzkcqRhn2NcZtADsxWrMBgZXkLE/dP67SnyFjWYpz7aNpxxA+mb5WBT+ NrSetJlljT0QOXrXMGh98GLfNnLAl6gJryE6MZazN5oxkJgkAep8SevFXzglj7CAsh4PABEB AAG0Nk1hcmNvIFRpbG9jYSAobWFyY28udGlsb2NhQHJpLnNlKSA8bWFyY28udGlsb2NhQHJp LnNlPokBNwQTAQgAIQUCWkAnkAIbAwULCQgHAgYVCAkKCwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAAKCRDuJmS0 DljaQwEvCACJKPJIPGH0oGnLJY4G1I2DgNiyVKt1H4kkc/eT8Bz9OSbAxgZo3Jky382e4Dba ayWrQRFen0aLSFuzbU4BX4O/YRSaIqUO3KwUNO1iTC65OHz0XirGohPUOsc0SEMtpm+4zfYG 7G8p35MK0h9gpwgGMG0j0mZX4RDjuywC88i1VxCwMWGaZRlUrPXkC3nqDDRcPtuEGpncWhAV Qt2ZqeyITv9KCUmDntmXLPe6vEXtOfI9Z3HeqeI8OkGwXpotVobgLa/mVmFj6EALDzj7HC2u tfgxECBJddmcDInrvGgTkZtXEVbyLQuiK20lJmYnmPWN8DXaVVaQ4XP/lXUrzoEzuQENBFSN eRUBCACWmp+k6LkY4/ey7eA7umYVc22iyVqAEXmywDYzEjewYwRcjTrH/Nx1EqwjIDuW+BBE oMLRZOHCgmjo6HRmWIutcYVCt9ieokultkor9BBoQVPiI+Tp51Op02ifkGcrEQNZi7q3fmOt hFZwZ6NJnUbA2bycaKZ8oClvDCQj6AjEydBPnS73UaEoDsqsGVjZwChfOMg5OyFm90QjpIw8 m0uDVcCzKKfxq3T/z7tyRgucIUe84EzBuuJBESEjK/hF0nR2LDh1ShD29FWrFZSNVVCVu1UY ZLAayf8oKKHHpM+whfjEYO4XsDpV4zQ15A+D15HRiHR6Adf4PDtPM1DCwggjABEBAAGJAR8E GAECAAkFAlSNeRUCGwwACgkQ7iZktA5Y2kPGEwf/WNjTy3z74vLmHycVsFXXoQ8W1+858mRy Ad0a8JYzY3xB7CVtqI3Hy894Qcw4H6G799A1OL9B1EeA8Yj3aOz0NbUyf5GW+iotr3h8+KIC OYZ34/BQaOLzdvDNmRoGHn+NeTzhF7eSeiPKi2jex+NVodhjOVGXw8EhYGkeZLvynHEboiLM 4TbyPbVR9HsdVqKGVTDxKSE3namo3kvtY6syRFIiUz5WzJfYAuqbt6m3TxDEb8sA9pzaLuhm fnJRc12H5NVZEZmE/EkJFTlkP4wnZyOSf/r2/Vd0iHauBwv57cpY6HFFMe7rvK4s7ME5zctO Ely5C6NCu1ZaNtdUuqDSPA== X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <160433581829.22846.13265405336502302804@ietfa.amsl.com> Message-ID: <7fcf855c-8ddf-9867-5602-71f7e954d15b@ri.se> Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:10:01 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 In-Reply-To: <160433581829.22846.13265405336502302804@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="J68sksODOil0SNNXtvPEI1tphVoQrNWo1" X-Originating-IP: [45.12.220.244] X-ClientProxiedBy: HE1PR05CA0323.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:92::18) To DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:10:16e::14) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from [10.8.1.4] (45.12.220.244) by HE1PR05CA0323.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:92::18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3541.21 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 08:10:03 +0000 X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 0a714d7f-082d-4d45-3452-08d8822b5d44 X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: DB8P189MB1047: X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:2887; X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1 X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: ppgZj5dX2qwwKOc70F3LYKLInXFJ+mCrUSFg1Q1TVo20RkOwplIQu1yoK4vu0rSQtS+PgIX73LoZJm4jlzT6CochPfvZnbJE2rgHqJBGVJgcuPn6HegBSPjDTeQu2N+T3un03/aYYid+0GREXgLujBDt9xdEJSrDCFOBc1YOxI/DaZOfOue2YD/bRuhiF8oJ8goIe6zGjFemG8hmMTAyLvO5aqIhK0PfgKBJEsMGRFKnwD2qbyi7vP17cv3iIJ8Y1BQ66zxVj9y2eJrIhxv8fjaTkontPAF+nRsaefCx4x1gXNOON3kYZnmP8DrI2qR7zse7NBDQsjnouJzVo5sIG/srhj1aPojAHENaZSX8jG7YjncQpoJWZsVj6pvRTFMqihW2IL69gIhqx/pOWfjPzD+2+eItqtJgTfPaNgzirs+H/dZVaHrRHopl0BsxgqQUr1lq+b7oK3FlRCYXFSmeqg== X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(366004)(39850400004)(136003)(396003)(346002)(376002)(16576012)(44832011)(6916009)(966005)(45080400002)(316002)(86362001)(8676002)(2616005)(956004)(52116002)(478600001)(33964004)(31696002)(26005)(83380400001)(21480400003)(8936002)(66946007)(66556008)(66476007)(30864003)(166002)(15650500001)(66574015)(6486002)(186003)(36756003)(5660300002)(235185007)(2906002)(16526019)(31686004)(43740500002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData: 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 X-OriginatorOrg: ri.se X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 0a714d7f-082d-4d45-3452-08d8822b5d44 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Nov 2020 08:10:03.5061 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 5a9809cf-0bcb-413a-838a-09ecc40cc9e8 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: ZAVuc+hin8eIoMYJe83eOj3BtB09kbbu45NWLPY07QN1R7rvClTgudhYtqDhdUYQjM2/iMsf+R06c0LrEYugRQ== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB8P189MB1047 Archived-At: Subject: [Ace] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile-04.txt X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 08:10:11 -0000 --J68sksODOil0SNNXtvPEI1tphVoQrNWo1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="kViWwVMAH5yRoDTYaOz3WYG8L0SulFDeC" --kViWwVMAH5yRoDTYaOz3WYG8L0SulFDeC Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------CD0E30344A8851BBFEEE1601" Content-Language: en-US This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------CD0E30344A8851BBFEEE1601 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello ACE, We have recently submitted an updated version of draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile-04 The document describes a profile of ACE where client and resource server(s) communicate with Group OSCORE. This supports fine-grained access control in group communication environments, where different group members have different access rights to the resources of the servers in the group. This version further builds on the major update done in v -02, with the profile now focused on Group OSCORE as only security protocol. Changes ar= e: 1) Clarifications on proof-of-possession, mutual authentication and token protection, consistently with the equivalent statements in the latest OSCORE profile [1]. 2) Update to the "Dual Mode" in Appendix A to be aligned with the latest OSCORE profile [1], especially as to the ID negotiation of Client and Resource Server. Comments are very welcome! Best, /Marco [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13 -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile-04.txt Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 08:50:18 -0800 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Francesca Palombini , Marco Tiloca , Ludwig Seitz , Rikard Hoeglund A new version of I-D, draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile-04.txt has been successfully submitted by Rikard Hoeglund and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile Revision: 04 Title: Group OSCORE Profile of the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments Framework Document date: 2020-11-02 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 54 URL: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.i= etf.org%2Farchive%2Fid%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile-04.txt&= ;data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C5d08d39c137444bf09fe08d87f4f626a= %7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399326982038641%7CUnknow= n%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXV= CI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=3DKFwFs%2B7wkrmM1ABWgpzAkCQUOqFgn9aJEVf4%2F8J5= KLw%3D&reserved=3D0 Status: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fdatat= racker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile%2F&data= =3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C5d08d39c137444bf09fe08d87f4f626a%7C5a= 9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399326982038641%7CUnknown%7CT= WFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn= 0%3D%7C2000&sdata=3DZv7y5wfCSd4frHbgP1j%2Fx5KNolY9mP8G1xB94hfvOlw%3D&= amp;reserved=3D0 Htmlized: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fdatat= racker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile&= data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C5d08d39c137444bf09fe08d87f4f626a%= 7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399326982038641%7CUnknown= %7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVC= I6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=3DFINy%2BdiJotA8JCsryqKFaPLeqIjxLM29o1a7MTDf8yw= %3D&reserved=3D0 Htmlized: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Ftools= =2Eietf.org%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile-04&data=3D= 04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C5d08d39c137444bf09fe08d87f4f626a%7C5a980= 9cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399326982038641%7CUnknown%7CTWFp= bGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3= D%7C2000&sdata=3D09l%2F3Ph1bTjWAgni1WLU0A4mm%2FHsdOHU%2FOym1Vs0zxw%3D= &reserved=3D0 Diff: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.i= etf.org%2Frfcdiff%3Furl2%3Ddraft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile-04&d= ata=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C5d08d39c137444bf09fe08d87f4f626a%7= C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399326982038641%7CUnknown%= 7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI= 6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=3D9ydrxTKn%2Bo%2BgbYNKMbtvMJ1%2FRkWzq6V%2F4kUFar= w4Oc8%3D&reserved=3D0 Abstract: This document specifies a profile for the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments (ACE) framework. The profile uses Group OSCORE to provide communication security between a Client and a (set of) Resource Server(s) as members of an OSCORE Group. The profile securely binds an OAuth 2.0 Access Token with the public key of the Client associated to the signing private key used in the OSCORE group. The profile uses Group OSCORE to achieve server authentication, as well as proof-of-possession for the Client's public key. Also, it provides proof of the Client's membership to the correct OSCORE group, by binding the Access Token to information from the Group OSCORE Security Context, thus allowing the Resource Server(s) to verify the Client's membership upon receiving a message protected with Group OSCORE from the Client. Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submiss= ion until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. The IETF Secretariat --------------CD0E30344A8851BBFEEE1601 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello ACE,

We have recently submitted an updated version of draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile

https://tools.ietf.org/html/d= raft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile-04

The document describes a profile of ACE where client and resource server(s) communicate with Group OSCORE. This supports fine-grained access control in group communication environments, where different group members have different access rights to the resources of the servers in the group.

This version further builds on the major update done in v -02, with the profile now focused on Group OSCORE as only security protocol. Changes are:

1) Clarifications on proof-of-possession, mutual authentication and token protection, consistently with the equivalent statements in the latest OSCORE profile [1].

2) Update to the "Dual Mode" in Appendix A to be aligned with the latest OSCORE profile [1], especially as to the ID negotiation of Client and Resource Server.


Comments are very welcome!

Best,
/Marco

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft= -ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Sub= ject: New Version Notification for draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile-04.txt
Dat= e: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 08:50:18 -0800
Fro= m: internet-drafts@ietf.org
To:= Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@ericsson.com>, = Marco Tiloca <marco.tiloca@ri.se>, Ludwig Seitz <ludwig.seitz@combitech.se>, Rikard Hoeglund <rikard.hoglund@ri.se>



A new version of I-D, draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile-04.txt<= br> has been successfully submitted by Rikard Hoeglund and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name: draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile
Revision: 04
Title: Group OSCORE Profile of the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments Framework
Document date: 2020-11-02
Group: Individual Submission
Pages: 54
URL: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%= 2Fwww.ietf.org%2Farchive%2Fid%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile-04.= txt&amp;data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C5d08d39c137444bf09fe0= 8d87f4f626a%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C6373993269820386= 41%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik= 1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&amp;sdata=3DKFwFs%2B7wkrmM1ABWgpzAkCQUOqF= gn9aJEVf4%2F8J5KLw%3D&amp;reserved=3D0
Status: ht= tps://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fdatatra= cker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile%2F&amp;da= ta=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C5d08d39c137444bf09fe08d87f4f626a%7C= 5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399326982038641%7CUnknown%7= CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6= Mn0%3D%7C2000&amp;sdata=3DZv7y5wfCSd4frHbgP1j%2Fx5KNolY9mP8G1xB94hfvO= lw%3D&amp;reserved=3D0
Htmlized: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fda= tatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile&a= mp;amp;data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C5d08d39c137444bf09fe08d87f= 4f626a%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399326982038641%7C= Unknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWw= iLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&amp;sdata=3DFINy%2BdiJotA8JCsryqKFaPLeqIjxLM29= o1a7MTDf8yw%3D&amp;reserved=3D0
Htmlized: h= ttps://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Ftools.= ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile-04&amp;data=3D= 04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C5d08d39c137444bf09fe08d87f4f626a%7C5a980= 9cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637399326982038641%7CUnknown%7CTWFp= bGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3= D%7C2000&amp;sdata=3D09l%2F3Ph1bTjWAgni1WLU0A4mm%2FHsdOHU%2FOym1Vs0zx= w%3D&amp;reserved=3D0
Diff: https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2= F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Frfcdiff%3Furl2%3Ddraft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile= -04&amp;data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C5d08d39c137444bf09fe0= 8d87f4f626a%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C6373993269820386= 41%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik= 1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&amp;sdata=3D9ydrxTKn%2Bo%2BgbYNKMbtvMJ1%2= FRkWzq6V%2F4kUFarw4Oc8%3D&amp;reserved=3D0

Abstract:
This document specifies a profile for the Authentication and
Authorization for Constrained Environments (ACE) framework. The
= profile uses Group OSCORE to provide communication security between a
Client and a (set of) Resource Server(s) as members of an OSCORE Group. The profile securely binds an OAuth 2.0 Access Token with the
public key of the Client associated to the signing private key used
in the OSCORE group. The profile uses Group OSCORE to achieve server
authentication, as well as proof-of-possession for the Client's
= public key. Also, it provides proof of the Client's membership to the correct OSCORE group, by binding the Access Token to information
from the Group OSCORE Security Context, thus allowing the Resource<= br> Server(s) to verify the Client's membership upon receiving a message
protected with Group OSCORE from the Client.



Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat


--------------CD0E30344A8851BBFEEE1601-- --kViWwVMAH5yRoDTYaOz3WYG8L0SulFDeC-- --J68sksODOil0SNNXtvPEI1tphVoQrNWo1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEOEo4cV326Z7GypVg7iZktA5Y2kMFAl+lBNkACgkQ7iZktA5Y 2kNYowgAiYyCZfhpIMtAkYY6NypTVLqinSG3DrOSOUgj5GY2oAYdrUx9N4ZGhMED pfarLk7NlCU1G92L8ySIG3VTNobNkNRWjlCwfAB3OeqcCQteQtsIMSW0Ykv18kU+ jLKKFjzZw7hnkAAKbz1SDHg2ZouZSseCfwFnFoutWcONkHtUOI1dvby1bGVfZeur ILXHY729AG38+GztLLuTq0dAMNRbe/9V5vht94j2ykv6xK8shKThGGGypkLI5UF/ tjcsD6c6bHuNuRuk4tRSWADJcsWw7MrXifki30mZa4QuetSjuAG7Q2ol0ZNASUN8 e7zKg6Rf4E8k3x49sUR+6dNmSV+qYg== =+R8w -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --J68sksODOil0SNNXtvPEI1tphVoQrNWo1-- From nobody Sun Nov 8 14:52:04 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9885C3A0FC1 for ; Sun, 8 Nov 2020 14:52:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BAVwYg6-Y6BY for ; Sun, 8 Nov 2020 14:52:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vs1-xe2a.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3F5D3A0FC0 for ; Sun, 8 Nov 2020 14:52:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe2a.google.com with SMTP id h5so3964181vsp.3 for ; Sun, 08 Nov 2020 14:52:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=ZQsThpnHT+BLP4oCxxhgHQHEGdtrHj8hiajok7xoW18=; b=cOb4/2qky26TkW1ZGidQP8fIZnMsgmtbmdcIht1OcEFGSRqfQH/gGb1raejjAlnHC/ d0+MBup04Ud65fhO5a1AbMiwv4AHbhUpGHlo1Q/lr0bFMLePYiQ6yUjVx7flZCR76Y8r a+tAIQa3fF3CV0/veoAXUk1AXWd+LH08hYRV0uUN721rPH58Z9XDlT8+mpn+JFcZX50l eb9Tld+L8UsVijSUVmy2Q7fNzgHyGAngIVgkwbO50khp3IhyeiP8wdoel3d0aB30l7tP YtkzCEO0FNL1r/jdk6Vcs6ehliRvE0aDJFeD6UaFp40Kyf1ZRGeGHzZrtYI53R9IKeEF M7YQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=ZQsThpnHT+BLP4oCxxhgHQHEGdtrHj8hiajok7xoW18=; b=GCWD+AmoJAEFmq3Oh7RYCNuKhPbXxCbM16ycvFl9jhG2FTOCOKZUsanu7auY0VyTpK IxFzuKRDLCzSf7krJLMmAzRaN3kVRFBkqJRFrfvWhRtKurBxr9nsvbv4bNgdvQoVs7nt IgKfk1VMSnV1MC3MszVxp4FqW8ffq/S926YWkU3HPc/Xo63h4qp5HwhEtwQl3xh0iTGh dGqdfp2LnOEzVa/TaRpb/8Zv9VnS2xJC14gRjQdZXx4WUmBq3EgcVX7hb2grnmVzbKj5 KiEhx1Y3YUDTL/zKz05nCil5GfMuFB4HjsT+QTXwhX0fTFqZQfZB7lNERpqvNZYW/FiI tpnw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532uHAF5/Bk0d8MY6kX/usJRWsSD+xv9hFZWr74T/PlV4rDEYKnR l1QjOdRHXipkpqu0CRlDIcg3KavGWfRuSyx12TuKZxRYMqDrJA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz15bcCjy9TreTpElaXSgdSP/ycSDTeOmW3Ubys5PuwzvpHyd+Tl7QbKQXXkZ/idPrKVkVbyqtyrYsASUjaPm4= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:309a:: with SMTP id l26mr6409057vsb.4.1604875919395; Sun, 08 Nov 2020 14:51:59 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <160381525062.27226.4156909974711721360@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <160381525062.27226.4156909974711721360@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Daniel Migault Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 17:51:48 -0500 Message-ID: To: Ace Wg Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000158c9005b3a04b27" Archived-At: Subject: [Ace] WGLC draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13.txt X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2020 22:52:03 -0000 --000000000000158c9005b3a04b27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, This email starts a WGLC for the draft draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile until Monday November 23. We would like to send the document back to the IESG with sufficient confidence, so please take the time to review it carefully provide comments and feed backs. Note that also that the document (13) is being reviewed by the security directorate. Yours, Daniel [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile/ ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Date: Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 12:14 PM Subject: [Ace] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13.txt To: Cc: A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments WG of the IETF. Title : OSCORE Profile of the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments Framework Authors : Francesca Palombini Ludwig Seitz G=C3=B6ran Selander Martin Gunnarsson Filename : draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13.txt Pages : 32 Date : 2020-10-27 Abstract: This memo specifies a profile for the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments (ACE) framework. It utilizes Object Security for Constrained RESTful Environments (OSCORE) to provide communication security and proof-of-possession for a key owned by the client and bound to an OAuth 2.0 access token. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submissio= n until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ _______________________________________________ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace --=20 Daniel Migault Ericsson --000000000000158c9005b3a04b27 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,=C2=A0

This email starts a WGLC for = the draft draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile until Monday November 23. We would = like to send the document back to the IESG with sufficient confidence, so p= lease take the time to review it carefully provide comments and feed backs.=
Note that also that the document (13) is being reviewed by the s= ecurity directorate.

Yours,=C2=A0
Daniel=C2=A0 = =C2=A0

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-o= score-profile/

---------- Forw= arded message ---------
From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
Date: T= ue, Oct 27, 2020 at 12:14 PM
Subject: [Ace] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ace-o= score-profile-13.txt
To: <i= -d-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: <ac= e@ietf.org>



A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies.
This draft is a work item of the Authentication and Authorization for Const= rained Environments WG of the IETF.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Title=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0:= OSCORE Profile of the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Env= ironments Framework
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Authors=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0: Fran= cesca Palombini
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Ludwig Seitz
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 G=C3=B6ran Selander
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Martin Gunnarsson
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Filename=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : draft-iet= f-ace-oscore-profile-13.txt
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Pages=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0:= 32
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Date=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 := 2020-10-27

Abstract:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0This memo specifies a profile for the Authentication and
=C2=A0 =C2=A0Authorization for Constrained Environments (ACE) framework.=C2= =A0 It
=C2=A0 =C2=A0utilizes Object Security for Constrained RESTful Environments<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0(OSCORE) to provide communication security and proof-of-posses= sion
=C2=A0 =C2=A0for a key owned by the client and bound to an OAuth 2.0 access= token.


The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draf= t-ietf-ace-oscore-profile/

There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-a= ce-oscore-profile-13
https://datatracker.ietf.org/d= oc/html/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url= 2=3Ddraft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submissio= n
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/


_______________________________________________
Ace mailing list
Ace@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace


--
Dani= el Migault
Ericsson
--000000000000158c9005b3a04b27-- From nobody Sun Nov 8 18:01:56 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C82C3A108E for ; Sun, 8 Nov 2020 18:01:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GfEyYfeACFO3 for ; Sun, 8 Nov 2020 18:01:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vk1-xa36.google.com (mail-vk1-xa36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83FDB3A108B for ; Sun, 8 Nov 2020 18:01:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vk1-xa36.google.com with SMTP id a8so1570466vkm.2 for ; Sun, 08 Nov 2020 18:01:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=WHf3J7/FNXMD99ODJ2oxMuumhhEYcxgxYfGmvilQYMw=; b=FsUIXZu5QeicaU2MGT5gaZa9zsMsGFTDkgFHLywBm0LeW1wJLtVSALt73IsbjLOt8W bFNoitizIRV4PfJRVCYUFkEo+ZhSL+bIvVTMeEwNKfppFAWvoJhdGD6i0eFHyX2LoluG WG55M329Meuu1A+n4GX+Ks7beCiEZa9Zg5m//tQ0cd7rE8UerqQwmld/Yf3AYGO12xP5 HzmfrZf2YTTb7xyeAuCud+i4IuDLBveccCO9/chJnYPZM7pW5XyL6aeJe9lD9mP7FU32 LKBwXINAbDYfj4A1vNp/kxn9fKYQUgz2L2KDghrV/CgK/Q1tQlvBbjcSvmEIm7S5jAZQ 7GJw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=WHf3J7/FNXMD99ODJ2oxMuumhhEYcxgxYfGmvilQYMw=; b=sxsMIqSOIot/BMEH25iX0rc7YihlHXajrI0PnoWgp+v43bAkhKTVEdo6GTy4L0ZOvA lo1k2tDMCy9NI8tXVJ/2ssTmADdtVRJWTyz8YM9btTkIXqIBXOAuT9yebrrwaQLDQbpy 1cEngPqLj/Y+Ghkw2MsCghG27BCPNPPgAr7qQeNh6yhPdHu6SAVS5XlNHlLZ2d+AwsE0 bzhCZyZvrorPoA7fHiCT07buXefhqM4JPc3m3TCM2sGyi2f6au/1omi58lh+lZdDRHLl psyIOCm1MY294fQAG8ezeeUPAi9ZWtV0TPRLsHtcvnEwm5n3AdFmdSv7xkfwktK0FNgX Ttlw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530knK+IjlpDK50HabHdRcFrfzbM0rHPUB4AkcFc2hx09z5Oz5qP cBoJmWvsMSaeIRZoEKLnHbcHJsulOPfuzu1moCs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxp0X7yt5AmQZ3zGuM7xzby7azx1xxWtUC+db8MPA59der1NzHSUHwIgzPNN2KiXC0PWxv0HqhVAUzeB/Q6uuE= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:5587:: with SMTP id j129mr5996078vkb.0.1604887311630; Sun, 08 Nov 2020 18:01:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel Migault Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 21:01:40 -0500 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=B6ran_Selander?= Cc: Ace Wg Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001d438705b3a2f27d" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Call for agenda item for IETF 109 X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 02:01:54 -0000 --0000000000001d438705b3a2f27d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Please find a draft agenda [1]. It would be good that all active documents can provide an update to the WG, which could be done during the meeting as well as on the mailing list. We still have some room for additional presentations. If you want to present, feel free to add your slot Presenters, please upload your presentation by Monday 16 - especially if I need to validate the submission. Yours, Daniel [1] https://codimd.ietf.org/notes-ietf-109-ace On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 9:00 AM G=C3=B6ran Selander wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > > > If there is time we would like to discuss two drafts which are independen= t > but can be combined: > > > > - draft-selander-ace-ake-authz (this was discussed on the ACE list in > September) > - draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore (motivated in a recent mail about > the new charter) > > > > G=C3=B6ran > > > > > > On 2020-10-13, 18:33, "Ace" wrote: > > Hi, > > The Ace WG will meet during IETF 109. If you are willing to present, > please let me know by the end of the month what you are willing to presen= t > and the necessary time you need. > > > > Yours, > > Daniel > > > > -- > > Daniel Migault > > > > Ericsson > --=20 Daniel Migault Ericsson --0000000000001d438705b3a2f27d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,=C2=A0

Please find a draft agenda [1= ]. It would be good that all active documents can provide an update to the = WG, which could be done during the meeting as well as on the mailing list. = We still have some room for additional presentations. If you want to presen= t, feel free to add your slot

Presenters, please u= pload your presentation by Monday 16 - especially if I need to validate the= submission.

Yours,=C2=A0
Daniel=C2=A0


On T= ue, Nov 3, 2020 at 9:00 AM G=C3=B6ran Selander <goran.selander@ericsson.com> wrote:
=

Hi Daniel,=

=C2=A0

If there is time we would like = to discuss two drafts which are independent but can be combined:<= /u>

=C2=A0

  • draft-selander-ace-ake-authz (this was discu= ssed on the ACE list in September)
  • draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore (motivated in a recent m= ail about the new charter)

=C2=A0

G=C3=B6ran=

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

On 2020-10-13, 18:33, "Ace" <ace-bounces@ietf.org> wrote:<= /p>

Hi,

The Ace WG will meet duri= ng IETF 109. If you are willing to present, please let me know by the end o= f the month what you are willing to present and the necessary time you need= .=C2=A0=C2=A0

=C2=A0

Yours,

Daniel

=C2=A0

--

Daniel Migault<= /u>

=C2=A0

Ericsson



--
Daniel Migault
Ericsson
--0000000000001d438705b3a2f27d-- From nobody Tue Nov 10 18:01:48 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B99613A12E3 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 18:01:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NsvyEoJsslO4 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 18:01:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vs1-xe33.google.com (mail-vs1-xe33.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9EC7E3A12DA for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 18:01:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe33.google.com with SMTP id l22so302448vsa.4 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 18:01:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=yIH0+mmI36NXwb4OR1ekYGjyqtb6bEa1z0u4k3LQ+zo=; b=ERA4ra8uDyUwuYpcCouidWL1nBWaOkcOkUYIiWu8S3YMDkKXmMq3Qt64v39ii5tsoG ZVuRs+445aPbUfyRofjGpy3xmx87sph098hmRgMs7uqQiM1cYxUk1U4scwrCK+fKf2a0 kH+Gi8Rs/HKV3mcdRFXJnnWuUSzvoPCAETjVg1xN9uq3olqKZ3RmzLloyvKF6QlT6Qdp hT+SEgeYoy0+mJGEPOZaDKo8UJWv2QhxweVNxNhbnA7UDU6D6Ka16sZw5I02nhnsGIQJ yloI1ATzrSGJ8xM+i2xF4cuDC9p3Yqs1l7LmhAOtJw1Rm3Ydz+eZxAI+Nko8azGrxky/ riIg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=yIH0+mmI36NXwb4OR1ekYGjyqtb6bEa1z0u4k3LQ+zo=; b=lHxzKjj2szqlytOFCDPRJuzXRZVoiww/lmVb9W3Kt8J3MF0WJCJsz2YWF/QAogksyy A1g4VYq/bX5igKEXMJm+d3/ToRYJ4u68u/yVcVLsycjatRH7KvUBXf5BDSVW/oN4cClo F10A2Lg1ZhdT+q0d9yvQ7cNyqPadpYBQmK9bXcEyUVXUy4gvCBHyNvQzRZxv8b1m+/U7 vwTlxZ0TAxOh35czLQFiM3B250ws/vAlTZx0RL4JczzO3hTz4KQw7KfKjQX6qa6oKlYW jBGtTn8h7WXXyAVHxm4KiNk6XRd9xEf5tzTr9YYV/EyGRK2dGbaEufqiCyZTJK6GXjc2 lskQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530hu9zi1+1lNzC7sG3pbQtvVlpEXc6zowOCoMD7MnENxXP7dgE/ rVUUh0XUGnRbNulwjCdsez+yoC3k91j0nKuNZk6nAFbgY1w= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxQ4WiMumSdgdayqwnRtQ1Uwy/EAynngb1e0/KGKMweHden56GbDi7mO1WgKYXrioOoA2HzTEOau5+3XdDjEoQ= X-Received: by 2002:a67:7d8b:: with SMTP id y133mr6640835vsc.20.1605060103540; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 18:01:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel Migault Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 21:01:32 -0500 Message-ID: To: Ace Wg Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005093c505b3cb2d3d" Archived-At: Subject: [Ace] Fwd: Requesting NomCom feedback X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 02:01:47 -0000 --0000000000005093c505b3cb2d3d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Please consider providing feed backs to the nomcom! Yours, Daniel ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: STARK, BARBARA H Date: Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 7:13 PM Subject: Requesting NomCom feedback To: WG Chairs Hi WG Chairs, First: Thanks for your help in getting volunteers for NomCom and getting nominees. Your emails to your WGs have been priceless for making the NomCom process work. My last request of you is for help with getting feedback. We've heard from the usual suspects. I really want to hear from more of the community, and the ietf and Announcement lists just don't seem to reach enough people. Below is the text I just sent out to the Announcement and ietf lists. Feel free to use this or invent your own shorter version. Thx, Barbara ---------------------------- NomCom is considering nominees for AD positions, IETF Chair, IAB, LLC Board, and IETF Trust. We need more input from the community both on specific nominees and on over-arching topics regarding what the community wants from these specific groups and wants from its leadership in general. We need *your* input. ** Deadline for community feedback is Friday November 20. ** We've paid attention to discussions on the ietf list. Issues raised there have been brought up in interviews. We've also asked questions of nominees based on feedback received, and based on the "Topics" that people said were important. We're listening to you. But most of the input to date has come from a few consistently vocal people. We need to hear from more of you. I scheduled our office hours during the 2 weeks before next week's IETF, because IETF week is so busy. We have one more left (18:00-19:00 UTC November 11). No-one but NomCom members showed up for our first 3. =E2=98= =B9 If there is demand for more office hours, I'll schedule them; but this really doesn't seem to be the preferred format for input. Most input is coming in as either - email to nomcom20@ietf.org - feedback on https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2020/feedback/ On the feedback page, the specific nominees are all listed at the top. General Topics are at the bottom. We pay attention to all the comments we get through these channels. I'll also try to hang out in Gather.Town during IETF breaks next week. I'm not going to have a specific NomCom area in Gather.Town, because it was really lonely hanging out there during IETF 108. But please feel free to hunt me down and bend my ear -- on NomCom issues or just to chat. I miss seeing all of y'all! Barbara Barbara Stark NomCom 2020 Chair --=20 Daniel Migault Ericsson --0000000000005093c505b3cb2d3d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,=C2=A0

Please consider providing= feed backs to the nomcom!

Yours,=C2=A0
= Daniel
= ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: STARK, BARBARA H <bs7652@att.com>
Date: Tue, No= v 10, 2020 at 7:13 PM
Subject: Requesting NomCom feedback
To: WG Chai= rs <wgchairs@ietf.org>


Hi WG Chairs,
First: Thanks for your help in getting volunteers for NomCom and getting no= minees. Your emails to your WGs have been priceless for making the NomCom p= rocess work. My last request of you is for help with getting feedback. We&#= 39;ve heard from the usual suspects. I really want to hear from more of the= community, and the ietf and Announcement lists just don't seem to reac= h enough people.

Below is the text I just sent out to the Announcement and ietf lists. Feel = free to use this or invent your own shorter version.
Thx,
Barbara
----------------------------
NomCom is considering nominees for AD positions, IETF Chair, IAB, LLC Board= , and IETF Trust. We need more input from the community both on specific no= minees and on over-arching topics regarding what the community wants from t= hese specific groups and wants from its leadership in general. We need *you= r* input.

** Deadline for community feedback is Friday November 20. **

We've paid attention to discussions on the ietf list. Issues raised the= re have been brought up in interviews.

We've also asked questions of nominees based on feedback received, and = based on the "Topics" that people said were important.
We're listening to you.

But most of the input to date has come from a few consistently vocal people= . We need to hear from more of you.

I scheduled our office hours during the 2 weeks before next week's IETF= , because IETF week is so busy. We have one more left (18:00-19:00 UTC Nove= mber 11). No-one but NomCom members showed up for our first 3. =E2=98=B9 If= there is demand for more office hours, I'll schedule them; but this re= ally doesn't seem to be the preferred format for input.

Most input is coming in as either
=C2=A0- email to nom= com20@ietf.org
=C2=A0- feedback on https://datatracker.ietf.org/n= omcom/2020/feedback/
On the feedback page, the specific nominees are all listed at the top. Gene= ral Topics are at the bottom.
We pay attention to all the comments we get through these channels.

I'll also try to hang out in Gather.Town during IETF breaks next week. =
I'm not going to have a specific NomCom area in Gather.Town, because it= was really lonely hanging out there during IETF 108.
But please feel free to hunt me down and bend my ear -- on NomCom issues or= just to chat.
I miss seeing all of y'all!
Barbara

Barbara Stark
NomCom 2020 Chair






--
Dani= el Migault
Ericsson
--0000000000005093c505b3cb2d3d-- From nobody Thu Nov 12 15:06:25 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6A7F3A1037 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 15:06:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fzIjqgVdxlu9 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 15:06:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D634F3A0FB9 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 15:06:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from kduck.mit.edu ([24.16.140.251]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 0ACN69u9023484 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 18:06:14 -0500 Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 15:06:09 -0800 From: Benjamin Kaduk To: ace@ietf.org Message-ID: <20201112230609.GN39170@kduck.mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Archived-At: Subject: [Ace] call for (ACE) co-chairing interest X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 23:06:24 -0000 Hi all, With Jim's passing we have a vacancy as ACE co-chair. It is often the case that a good WG chair candidate is already interested in the WG technologies and thus participating in the WG (though someone who is very interested and authoring many drafts in the WG may be too close to the work to be a good chair). Accordingly, I would ask and encourage anyone who thinks they might be interested in co-chairing ACE, or co-chairing a different security-area WG, to let me know, so I can take that under consideration as I decide who to ask to take on the role. No one can exactly replace Jim, so it will be a different job for whoever takes it on, but it will be good to have some help for Daniel! Even if ACE is not a good fit for you, I do keep a list of people who have expressed interest in WG chairing in general, to have in mind as other openings arise. Thank you, Ben From nobody Fri Nov 13 07:26:08 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DBC33A0DA2 for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 07:26:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.101 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k_N_T_pqgPxB for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 07:26:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from EUR01-DB5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr150080.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.15.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E0113A0DA5 for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 07:26:04 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=NIGFhg2StK+5sECV+jyGzQL/6eJ2FX1PYaJjR+6+A2ufP/pFIuLV9fxtSPStiVPK3OGFO5Z5lHAgO2Ag6HaVldc3ii/867zKgCvf+QIoWSh4vkfHXAdXcU5QQt9K3b6ZatwcJOYpZk8TAcjnfivfY7xUyu0l/1dTPe6EFOxb7zEXAVf5CcZqS6qYKLT47QBOudKNcOE1MOuZC82d8I9U6SX50Gobuk5HelAZoCksr3fO1RH5p4vhDGzwsHhkbz4OPPTIYrvveycBvWfOuUzG/XLkcQogidVU0egNHFwekCILzGEUlS1mgGfSCBy/XRnMWRBlLHgHsM/RcqfSjsXM0A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=SkGZxddJO1/nPdChwLKWDtC46XxMBBMx2Kbppvv4KBM=; b=RftqxwdGwfTJ+jbaJHwcAkyCwv6sod81ko1oX4qlMHxScIvDSxvQyKLvlzz3IqylKsaoE5OJGK9gd6JLFteqPyhAHcfad2X9tE6f3gOFmXzboroqOPDRc4D8slGakDMjSBeGuvloR1SxqaMZfxBrmWWACpDhkDgP44RA5yHSvzIC6WFlhBycrnukxKdvcPeepq2zbT16+QfblhyXw7549AEWklWJRvMf3qq4oTKiIO4HOtoW3gQ0DpspPDuwnXLP4+XvxmRck2nC0yofkTQ5Pq+GN+TQXs4mJvyXeTRQrzXwjow8Kf2TdDyDTXMllgPN1HOtmADIO///zmkAGQuwDw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=SkGZxddJO1/nPdChwLKWDtC46XxMBBMx2Kbppvv4KBM=; b=UgfsobJuAXa90tR+gUsfE5kvYOXWGetphP2LLxjo4AN/yBIhn07osH54E+UgrQROdiHuGfAG+z4LMjyR2BoKL35ba980RTonnKxNyHi8Fv9bGTjkC2FykcIEGehE9Afdp0HfbTurS4KB8fI+L678X2xOh9WJt/9RVWnuKaS7yEU= Received: from HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:82::14) by HE1PR0702MB3609.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:83::33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3541.10; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:26:00 +0000 Received: from HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c99c:9978:10bb:e231]) by HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c99c:9978:10bb:e231%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3541.015; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:26:00 +0000 From: =?Windows-1252?Q?G=F6ran_Selander?= To: Daniel Migault , Ace Wg Thread-Topic: [Ace] Charter discussion Thread-Index: AQHWoxucbAjxceIga0igx21acPgYqanGVvbU Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:26:00 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com; x-originating-ip: [83.251.145.232] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: d21de6d9-52ab-41bc-0b0e-08d887e86d2d x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HE1PR0702MB3609: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 1ydI6JUVaNhZ9AyZDPlXtv1CnzbszdHKqrjCsqqBRFKcvvo6Ym2surnz3mfilybf28KsE711+wkx+YSRRdVkh6HCFRd5DWq3zXfNPNauqjdJKuV71gd1QKgtapD9Ma3CB0fBhFPAHBFw+8OKOHhoCHbto/gpuzvGk/tCwHp9nuTlsaHLz3VFy02BUWGwripu74ZwHRc6fmbRiwkM0eyh99LpVdxxNXLCWqUNhJCSdGSFXNATsE8Y53ClPw5qE3S8jEI8vdFZq4lnESQN5M58E1658ueRu7aoRgSBM48E6NqWa3w6KzV5TNS2jDTGo14AbTvvf8HhsHr265FCNqVCsKtuqLv0B8Px4p20tA5UYPTvBX45r576HTVUUXY0+aIv89y/6nvYtCqM89/IsyLM2nVq+DbWFgAgv/Ge9eL7XxX3ct6C0buGj5xlhnyZbeb+CTcCg6lr2yn47CU7ghtGpA== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(376002)(136003)(366004)(396003)(39860400002)(346002)(26005)(66574015)(53546011)(83380400001)(71200400001)(7696005)(66446008)(52536014)(186003)(110136005)(4001150100001)(66476007)(66946007)(76116006)(66556008)(2906002)(166002)(316002)(9686003)(55016002)(86362001)(33656002)(5660300002)(8936002)(8676002)(966005)(478600001)(6506007)(64756008)(15940465004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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 x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_HE1PR0702MB36740BAAFD7FDA2688564BF7F4E60HE1PR0702MB3674_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: HE1PR0702MB3674.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: d21de6d9-52ab-41bc-0b0e-08d887e86d2d X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Nov 2020 15:26:00.4887 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: jS7P29Q96dE73eN0z7esmCpRAFf3kR07NkzmQMp2WpfyXkhvkhtBtsexNmBTqO6qcL0wqAcnP/B7/hdl1xf8a+ln3dCxnou+aM6XKSadI+k= X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR0702MB3609 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:26:08 -0000 --_000_HE1PR0702MB36740BAAFD7FDA2688564BF7F4E60HE1PR0702MB3674_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Daniel, Here=92s another input to the charter. The current group key management solutions addresses the problem of authori= zed access to group keys and public keys of group members. A related problem is authorized access of public keys of other devices not = necessarily part of a security group, in the sense of sharing a symmetric k= ey used to protect group messages. Authorized access to raw public keys serves an important function in constr= ained settings where public key certificates may not be feasible due to the= incurred overhead, e.g. for when authenticating using EDHOC (draft-ietf-la= ke-edhoc). This functionality is thus a subset of what is already supported, but since= the current solution is geared towards groups a different solution may be = needed (although it is probably possible to reuse parts from the existing s= chemes for provisioning and requesting public keys). With this in mind, I propose the following change (highlighted in boldface = below): OLD The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and existing= profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of the framew= ork for additional secure communications protocols (that are not necessaril= y limited to constrained endpoints, though the focus remains on deployment = ecosystems with a substantial portion of constrained devices). NEW The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and existing= profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of the framew= ork for additional secure communications protocols and for additional suppo= rt services providing authorized access to crypto keys (that are not necess= arily limited to constrained endpoints, though the focus remains on deploym= ent ecosystems with a substantial portion of constrained devices). G=F6ran On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" wrote: Hi, I would like to start the charter discussion. Here is a draft of a proposed= charter [1]. It seems to be that additional discussion is needed with regard to the last= paragraph related certificate management. In particular the discussion mig= ht revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair = of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please make this dis= cussion constructive on this thread. The fundamental question is whether we need certificate management at this = stage. If the answer is yes, and we have multiple proposals, it would be go= od to clarify the position of the different proposals and evaluate whether = a selection is needed or not before validating the charter. Please provide your inputs on the mailing list before October 30. Of course= for minor edits, you may suggest them directly on the google doc. Yours, Daniel [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnB= XhoDiptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-interim-2017-ace-03-2017101913= 00/ [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-selander-ace-eals/ -- Daniel Migault Ericsson --_000_HE1PR0702MB36740BAAFD7FDA2688564BF7F4E60HE1PR0702MB3674_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Daniel,

 

Here=92s another input to the c= harter.

 

The current group key management solu= tions addresses the problem of authorized access to group keys and public k= eys of group members.

 

A related problem is authorized acces= s of public keys of other devices not necessarily part of a security group,= in the sense of sharing a symmetric key used to protect group messages.

 

Authorized access to raw public keys = serves an important function in constrained settings where public key certi= ficates may not be feasible due to the incurred overhead, e.g. for when authenticating using EDHOC (draft-ietf-lake-edhoc)= .

This functionality is thus a subset o= f what is already supported, but since the current solution is geared towar= ds groups a different solution may be needed (although it is probably possible to reuse parts from the existing schemes for provi= sioning and requesting public keys).

 

With this in mind, I propose th= e following change (highlighted in boldface below):

 

OLD

The Working Group is charged with maintenan= ce of the framework and existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work t= o specify profiles of the framework for additional secure communications protocols (that are not necessarily limited to const= rained endpoints, though the focus remains on deployment ecosystems with a = substantial portion of constrained devices).

 

NEW

The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework a= nd existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of= the framework for additional secure communications protocols and for additional support services providing authorized access to crypto= keys (that are not necessarily limited to constrained endpoin= ts, though the focus remains on deployment ecosystems with a substantial po= rtion of constrained devices).

 

G=F6ran

 

&nbs= p;

&nbs= p;

On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" <ace-bounces@ietf.org> wrote:

Hi,

I would like to start t= he charter discussion. Here is a draft of a proposed charter [1].

 

It seems to be that add= itional discussion is needed with regard to the last paragraph related cert= ificate management. In particular the discussion might revive a discussion = that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please= make this discussion constructive on this thread.

 

The fundamental questio= n is whether we need certificate management at this stage. If the answer is= yes, and we have multiple proposals, it would be good to clarify the posit= ion of the different proposals and evaluate whether a selection is needed or not before validating the charter. <= /o:p>

 

Please provide your inp= uts on the mailing list before October 30. Of course for minor edits, you m= ay suggest them directly on the google doc.

 

Yours,

Daniel

 

 

--

Daniel Migault

 

Ericsson

--_000_HE1PR0702MB36740BAAFD7FDA2688564BF7F4E60HE1PR0702MB3674_-- From nobody Sun Nov 15 23:59:36 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 235A43A157F; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 23:59:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id txt1eDFZWDbq; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 23:59:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from prometheus.amsuess.com (alt.prometheus.amsuess.com [IPv6:2a01:4f8:190:3064::3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B74FA3A141F; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 23:59:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from poseidon-mailhub.amsuess.com (095129206250.cust.akis.net [95.129.206.250]) by prometheus.amsuess.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C5D64083C; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 08:59:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from poseidon-mailbox.amsuess.com (poseidon-mailbox.amsuess.com [IPv6:2a02:b18:c13b:8010:a800:ff:fede:b1bf]) by poseidon-mailhub.amsuess.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECE55AB; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 08:59:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from hephaistos.amsuess.com (unknown [IPv6:2a02:b18:c13b:8010:15f9:e3c5:c0de:cf69]) by poseidon-mailbox.amsuess.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8BB74180; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 08:59:15 +0100 (CET) Received: (nullmailer pid 2659933 invoked by uid 1000); Mon, 16 Nov 2020 07:59:15 -0000 Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 08:59:15 +0100 From: Christian =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ams=FCss?= To: draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz@ietf.org, draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification@ietf.org, ace@ietf.org Message-ID: <20201116075915.GA2528811@hephaistos.amsuess.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rwEMma7ioTxnRzrJ" Content-Disposition: inline Archived-At: Subject: [Ace] oauth-authz: Introspection endpoint method X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 07:59:35 -0000 --rwEMma7ioTxnRzrJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello ACE-OAuth authors, authors of revoked-token-notifcation, and ACE group in general, while trying to understand the necessity for revoked-token-notification, I was looking into the introspection parts of ACE (draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-35 Section 5.7.1) and was confused at the method used there: Given the introspection endpoint is used for querying, why is it using the POST method? This indicates that the request may not be safe (in REST terminology), which seems not the case. This would have the nice properties of indicating its safeness to the rest of the stack (ie. the CoAP library can forego request deduplication). Also, it'd keep the door open for caching (where obviously `exi` would be inapplicable, but `Max-Age: ...` would be used instead), and observing a particular introspection would be possible. This sure wouldn't make revoked- obsolete, but I think it'd make the path there smoother, and help sharpen what the TRL adds. If there's no particular reason to keep POST and it's early enough for such a change, the change to the document would be minimal, and unless any implementation is built on a CoAP stack without support for RFC8132, changes there should be trivial. Best regards Christian Bycatch: The example in figure 13/14, the Uri-Path should probably be in Figure 14 instead, along with the inner code (which is suggested to change above). Given figure 15 is shown as the full protected message, the same format may work well for a single figure 13/14 as well (with just a note that this is an encrypted exchange). --=20 To use raw power is to make yourself infinitely vulnerable to greater power= s. -- Bene Gesserit axiom --rwEMma7ioTxnRzrJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEECM1tElX6OodcH7CWOY0REtOkveEFAl+yMU8ACgkQOY0REtOk veEdKw/6AjJaXExZXpntbZWGFMO4wvctuN8jJDccpD0clIco/JGLjxI9/06XGagn gshrT52zkUgU1gKHsIADF7x73fRJwljThSjzt6LrI1stB6xoE9DoypHLH++AJ8Ys NW0A8nGLsjbdHKLdm4WxzwPa8igg5mrpzK5axFbFZP4e4YP1J114HV0R9douKp4x 6lfXpogLpl3JUHgrA+kJ26LHEL483hkkmQWPKJxqAyaMHHx8cQTpGB6Fl7ZrY87n W4q00I5K0uLHb5uzH65XJqZi2K4rRurXy63J2qqPEVPSwKcvLF5P8orQfgvfSdmp FZKm49yI98f1I6PpBWa6bbsl9zsrc2gTK3B/ciZhhK6mCyMJHjChQsbc83VlqVdv Yn3kGX0tp6+XGkAwQlJ4Mp468GXAHHhkxlfKpXh/OSYInzwjm5KdtMnWnJDJ+/s9 zgS7CZkZI6cUS4ySP/BMZ3yfHFqvSp9XznDMZdzuF7jRjrY36OWEKw4I5AnTGqmE E6Gokeff9RilZAIH3LVMXstuwPZhmRUy5bP3o/a+F7RIvwQGH8FFY619KF106j1w 5fbHLox5d7vnqEIVl5hQXj9wz6MzxmNVoX/63bH+uQSCqIN0gy7J3l+uKh4rP/YK wi6EHSSwrdkme3vAGieUmKsrYzjnaoMzI+5XmiTJBtgBi2EC7I4= =gFQP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rwEMma7ioTxnRzrJ-- From nobody Mon Nov 16 04:34:21 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C9D03A0E26; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 04:34:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1aN_R5bujsZy; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 04:34:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from weald2.air.saab.se (weald2.air.saab.se [136.163.212.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45A4E3A0E25; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 04:34:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailhub1.air.saab.se ([136.163.213.4]) by weald2.air.saab.se (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 0AGCY8dD023906 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:34:08 +0100 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 weald2.air.saab.se 0AGCY8dD023906 Received: from corpappl16349.corp.saab.se (corpappl16349.corp.saab.se [10.12.12.112]) by mailhub1.air.saab.se (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 0AGCXs0A015165 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:33:54 +0100 Received: from corpappl16595.corp.saab.se (10.12.12.127) by corpappl16349.corp.saab.se (10.12.12.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2106.2; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:33:54 +0100 Received: from corpappl16595.corp.saab.se ([fe80::3c3e:6470:4c56:a86f]) by corpappl16595.corp.saab.se ([fe80::eca7:e370:adcc:2c99%6]) with mapi id 15.01.2106.003; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:33:54 +0100 From: Seitz Ludwig To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Christian_Ams=FCss?= , "draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz@ietf.org" , "draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token-notification@ietf.org" , "ace@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [EXTERNAL] oauth-authz: Introspection endpoint method Thread-Index: AQHWu+58cTmTbcxl8UCT9JNIgxeHCqnKsQyQ Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:33:54 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20201116075915.GA2528811@hephaistos.amsuess.com> In-Reply-To: <20201116075915.GA2528811@hephaistos.amsuess.com> Accept-Language: en-SE, sv-SE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.12.13.211] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Saab-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-Saab-MailScanner-ID: 0AGCXs0A015165 X-Saab-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Saab-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-1, required 5, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -1.00, BAYES_20 -0.00, URIBL_BLOCKED 0.00) X-Saab-MailScanner-From: ludwig.seitz@combitech.se X-Saab-MailScanner-Watermark: 1606134835.70297@7Rc9UugOQ1eWv8TpGqOWBw X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.2 (weald2.air.saab.se [136.163.212.4]); Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:34:08 +0100 (CET) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] [EXTERNAL] oauth-authz: Introspection endpoint method X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:34:20 -0000 Hi Christian, The short answer is: We aligned as close as possible with OAuth 2.0, and there Introspection use= s POST. /Ludwig > -----Original Message----- > From: Christian Ams=FCss > Sent: den 16 november 2020 08:59 > To: draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz@ietf.org; draft-tiloca-ace-revoked-token- > notification@ietf.org; ace@ietf.org > Subject: [EXTERNAL] oauth-authz: Introspection endpoint method >=20 > Hello ACE-OAuth authors, authors of revoked-token-notifcation, and ACE gr= oup > in general, >=20 > while trying to understand the necessity for revoked-token-notification, = I was > looking into the introspection parts of ACE > (draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-35 Section 5.7.1) and was confused at the met= hod > used there: >=20 >=20 > Given the introspection endpoint is used for querying, why is it using th= e POST > method? This indicates that the request may not be safe (in REST terminol= ogy), > which seems not the case. >=20 >=20 > This would have the nice properties of indicating its safeness to the res= t of the > stack (ie. the CoAP library can forego request deduplication). Also, it'd= keep the > door open for caching (where obviously `exi` would be inapplicable, but `= Max- > Age: ...` would be used instead), and observing a particular introspectio= n would > be possible. > This sure wouldn't make revoked- obsolete, but I think it'd make the path= there > smoother, and help sharpen what the TRL adds. >=20 > If there's no particular reason to keep POST and it's early enough for su= ch a > change, the change to the document would be minimal, and unless any > implementation is built on a CoAP stack without support for RFC8132, chan= ges > there should be trivial. >=20 > Best regards > Christian >=20 >=20 > Bycatch: The example in figure 13/14, the Uri-Path should probably be in = Figure > 14 instead, along with the inner code (which is suggested to change above= ). > Given figure 15 is shown as the full protected message, the same format m= ay > work well for a single figure 13/14 as well (with just a note that this i= s an > encrypted exchange). >=20 > -- > To use raw power is to make yourself infinitely vulnerable to greater pow= ers. > -- Bene Gesserit axiom From nobody Mon Nov 16 23:28:12 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietf.org Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 406CF3A113B; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 23:28:07 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: ace@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.22.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ace@ietf.org Message-ID: <160559808723.5073.3988234617456497047@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 23:28:07 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Ace] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36.txt X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:28:07 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments WG of the IETF. Title : Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments (ACE) using the OAuth 2.0 Framework (ACE-OAuth) Authors : Ludwig Seitz Goeran Selander Erik Wahlstroem Samuel Erdtman Hannes Tschofenig Filename : draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36.txt Pages : 87 Date : 2020-11-16 Abstract: This specification defines a framework for authentication and authorization in Internet of Things (IoT) environments called ACE- OAuth. The framework is based on a set of building blocks including OAuth 2.0 and the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP), thus transforming a well-known and widely used authorization solution into a form suitable for IoT devices. Existing specifications are used where possible, but extensions are added and profiles are defined to better serve the IoT use cases. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Mon Nov 16 23:33:09 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBD7D3A1148 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 23:33:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YEOS53IEMzx3 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 23:33:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from weald2.air.saab.se (weald2.air.saab.se [136.163.212.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52F253A1144 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 23:33:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailhub1.air.saab.se ([136.163.213.4]) by weald2.air.saab.se (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 0AH7X1cF017438 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 08:33:01 +0100 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 weald2.air.saab.se 0AH7X1cF017438 Received: from corpappl16590.corp.saab.se (corpappl16590.corp.saab.se [10.12.12.96]) by mailhub1.air.saab.se (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 0AH7WlmD020614 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 08:32:47 +0100 Received: from corpappl16595.corp.saab.se (10.12.12.127) by corpappl16590.corp.saab.se (10.12.12.96) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2106.2; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 08:32:47 +0100 Received: from corpappl16595.corp.saab.se ([fe80::3c3e:6470:4c56:a86f]) by corpappl16595.corp.saab.se ([fe80::eca7:e370:adcc:2c99%6]) with mapi id 15.01.2106.003; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 08:32:47 +0100 From: Seitz Ludwig To: "ace@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [EXTERNAL] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36.txt Thread-Index: AQHWvLM8XfRTzGQj20CEF+d8CcPoAKnL7TIg Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:32:47 +0000 Message-ID: References: <160559808741.5073.7181579285120290242@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <160559808741.5073.7181579285120290242@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-SE, sv-SE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.12.13.199] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Saab-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-Saab-MailScanner-ID: 0AH7WlmD020614 X-Saab-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Saab-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-0.999, required 5, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -1.00, URIBL_BLOCKED 0.00) X-Saab-MailScanner-From: ludwig.seitz@combitech.se X-Saab-MailScanner-Watermark: 1606203167.75293@DAGdlXAcWmibG1fWqbzC1A X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.2 (weald2.air.saab.se [136.163.212.4]); Tue, 17 Nov 2020 08:33:01 +0100 (CET) Archived-At: Subject: [Ace] FW: [EXTERNAL] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36.txt X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:33:07 -0000 SGVsbG8gQUNFLA0KDQpJbiBvcmRlciB0byBtb3ZlIHRoZSBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIGZvcndhcmQgSSBk ZWNpZGVkIHRvIGltcGxlbWVudCB0aGUgY2hhbmdlcyBzdWdnZXN0ZWQgYnkgU3RlZmZpIHRvIGFk ZHJlc3MgdGhlIGNvbW1lbnRzIHJhaXNlZCBieSBKb2huLiBUaGFuayB5b3UgZm9yIHRoaXMgY29u dHJpYnV0aW9uIFN0ZWZmaS4gVGhpcyB1cGRhdGUgYWxzbyBmaXhlcyB0d28gbWlub3IgaXNzdWVz IGZvdW5kIGJ5IEZyYW5jZXNjYSAobWlzbWF0Y2hlcyBpbiBkYXRhdHlwZXMgYmV0d2VlbiB0ZXh0 IGFuZCBmaWd1cmVzLCBzZWUgZGlmZiBvciBnaXRodWIgZm9yIGRldGFpbHMpLg0KDQovTHVkd2ln DQoNCi0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQpGcm9tOiBpbnRlcm5ldC1kcmFmdHNAaWV0 Zi5vcmcgPGludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0c0BpZXRmLm9yZz4gDQpTZW50OiBkZW4gMTcgbm92ZW1iZXIg MjAyMCAwODoyOA0KVG86IEhhbm5lcyBUc2Nob2ZlbmlnIDxoYW5uZXMudHNjaG9mZW5pZ0Bhcm0u Y29tPjsgU2VpdHogTHVkd2lnIDxsdWR3aWcuc2VpdHpAY29tYml0ZWNoLnNlPjsgR29lcmFuIFNl bGFuZGVyIDxnb3Jhbi5zZWxhbmRlckBlcmljc3Nvbi5jb20+OyBFcmlrIFdhaGxzdHJvZW0gPGVy aWtAd2FobHN0cm9tc3Rla25pc2thLnNlPjsgU2FtdWVsIEVyZHRtYW4gPGVyZHRtYW5Ac3BvdGlm eS5jb20+DQpTdWJqZWN0OiBbRVhURVJOQUxdIE5ldyBWZXJzaW9uIE5vdGlmaWNhdGlvbiBmb3Ig ZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1hY2Utb2F1dGgtYXV0aHotMzYudHh0DQoNCg0KQSBuZXcgdmVyc2lvbiBvZiBJ LUQsIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtYWNlLW9hdXRoLWF1dGh6LTM2LnR4dCBoYXMgYmVlbiBzdWNjZXNzZnVs bHkgc3VibWl0dGVkIGJ5IEx1ZHdpZyBTZWl0eiBhbmQgcG9zdGVkIHRvIHRoZSBJRVRGIHJlcG9z aXRvcnkuDQoNCk5hbWU6CQlkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWFjZS1vYXV0aC1hdXRoeg0KUmV2aXNpb246CTM2 DQpUaXRsZToJCUF1dGhlbnRpY2F0aW9uIGFuZCBBdXRob3JpemF0aW9uIGZvciBDb25zdHJhaW5l ZCBFbnZpcm9ubWVudHMgKEFDRSkgdXNpbmcgdGhlIE9BdXRoIDIuMCBGcmFtZXdvcmsgKEFDRS1P QXV0aCkNCkRvY3VtZW50IGRhdGU6CTIwMjAtMTEtMTcNCkdyb3VwOgkJYWNlDQpQYWdlczoJCTg3 DQpVUkw6ICAgICAgICAgICAgaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvYXJjaGl2ZS9pZC9kcmFmdC1p ZXRmLWFjZS1vYXV0aC1hdXRoei0zNi50eHQNClN0YXR1czogICAgICAgICBodHRwczovL2RhdGF0 cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLWFjZS1vYXV0aC1hdXRoei8NCkh0bWxpemVk OiAgICAgICBodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9odG1sL2RyYWZ0LWlldGYt YWNlLW9hdXRoLWF1dGh6DQpIdG1saXplZDogICAgICAgaHR0cHM6Ly90b29scy5pZXRmLm9yZy9o dG1sL2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtYWNlLW9hdXRoLWF1dGh6LTM2DQpEaWZmOiAgICAgICAgICAgaHR0cHM6 Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvcmZjZGlmZj91cmwyPWRyYWZ0LWlldGYtYWNlLW9hdXRoLWF1dGh6LTM2 DQoNCkFic3RyYWN0Og0KICAgVGhpcyBzcGVjaWZpY2F0aW9uIGRlZmluZXMgYSBmcmFtZXdvcmsg Zm9yIGF1dGhlbnRpY2F0aW9uIGFuZA0KICAgYXV0aG9yaXphdGlvbiBpbiBJbnRlcm5ldCBvZiBU aGluZ3MgKElvVCkgZW52aXJvbm1lbnRzIGNhbGxlZCBBQ0UtDQogICBPQXV0aC4gIFRoZSBmcmFt ZXdvcmsgaXMgYmFzZWQgb24gYSBzZXQgb2YgYnVpbGRpbmcgYmxvY2tzIGluY2x1ZGluZw0KICAg T0F1dGggMi4wIGFuZCB0aGUgQ29uc3RyYWluZWQgQXBwbGljYXRpb24gUHJvdG9jb2wgKENvQVAp LCB0aHVzDQogICB0cmFuc2Zvcm1pbmcgYSB3ZWxsLWtub3duIGFuZCB3aWRlbHkgdXNlZCBhdXRo b3JpemF0aW9uIHNvbHV0aW9uIGludG8NCiAgIGEgZm9ybSBzdWl0YWJsZSBmb3IgSW9UIGRldmlj ZXMuICBFeGlzdGluZyBzcGVjaWZpY2F0aW9ucyBhcmUgdXNlZA0KICAgd2hlcmUgcG9zc2libGUs IGJ1dCBleHRlbnNpb25zIGFyZSBhZGRlZCBhbmQgcHJvZmlsZXMgYXJlIGRlZmluZWQgdG8NCiAg IGJldHRlciBzZXJ2ZSB0aGUgSW9UIHVzZSBjYXNlcy4NCg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgIA0KDQoNClBsZWFzZSBub3RlIHRoYXQgaXQgbWF5IHRha2UgYSBjb3VwbGUgb2YgbWludXRl cyBmcm9tIHRoZSB0aW1lIG9mIHN1Ym1pc3Npb24gdW50aWwgdGhlIGh0bWxpemVkIHZlcnNpb24g YW5kIGRpZmYgYXJlIGF2YWlsYWJsZSBhdCB0b29scy5pZXRmLm9yZy4NCg0KVGhlIElFVEYgU2Vj cmV0YXJpYXQNCg0KDQo= From nobody Tue Nov 17 00:16:34 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9EE23A074B for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 00:16:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MWpGY8DRYR2c for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 00:16:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vs1-xe36.google.com (mail-vs1-xe36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF5F13A0659 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 00:16:23 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe36.google.com with SMTP id m16so10599998vsl.8 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 00:16:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=GKvO8Zs9dlJTqis4EI4YOviAVzYtftr959YJ4GE0stE=; b=bs005PA2Onkc0rlEbcbIJocD/hEu+NR03YTWYw15K4u0X8dALpr4qM3W/26UznBeJq P6RINdE348kuUk6jc9t3D54+WhTr3kLDfQ+VwamnzB0a7v5iNTFVlkTV7RpLJ74GrFIj 7OjnhR2xOnro+0Kny2gi1V6YVO2Hb/xTQa45T0i4criUwcwFGBmzHGRaxSmUajNzJwro IFbnN14z3XH1CT8F5nTqn4I5E9uKuZv+29+icKSduPm7owfqRN8XlmI2BtL7OX1NB/uA elETS37/6ShSz2UrqQxNFclPolBp2c91GMaJkrHLXexOvr0zy3Lp4M2j753WZ6oKn9tO DKUQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=GKvO8Zs9dlJTqis4EI4YOviAVzYtftr959YJ4GE0stE=; b=KO5MKYkyqt9W0/HC68REk0h6j2LWFet1OBEx/mrV2uerPFqi17Qm++3nIXmiEMpqJz 8IY5caxSuDHvorggHe1dSzqe1wQCprQXkxBdkKcBkbiKHJGaPzi2UYSo8nlXe+jAwMjn tVttDpuExfEONqu0OZUxNuSzN7+KoelgVgMfT3XAlfnT7zSR2b1dVmOM164LgDscMfoD jq4tY4+2jnG4r7SmXoCaZoeGNZswJfos91/N6O7j6Wq/iOVNh/+hMU7udcItmOQQbU2Q h6hNoZbh85T5g97d0o68JQRkB0mpWMuFc3AKf8Rh37Zt8BiTKZ8ayATdzdvfO9dcrDNq Y84Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5322SwwPnL+aC7UcOP04kjWOrpX2OzAzMOhbYiw5rE4OiX6E8onu 8hAFiOqp66CvgMVkW3wZQj/6HZTCujR55eCF7g8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyKwe3nP7IejqVnUOuaNHKcyo9mDY/kO54sy7zDA4o3bC6C3W8s68PG7ZMQfiq0/wRMmA6QmQTm+ImKOmd45TA= X-Received: by 2002:a67:7d8b:: with SMTP id y133mr11483602vsc.20.1605600982797; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 00:16:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <160559808741.5073.7181579285120290242@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: From: Daniel Migault Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 03:16:11 -0500 Message-ID: To: Seitz Ludwig Cc: "ace@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003b10f405b4491cc7" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] FW: [EXTERNAL] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36.txt X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 08:16:33 -0000 --0000000000003b10f405b4491cc7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Thanks Ludwig, I understand all concerns have been addressed. Yours, Daniel On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 2:33 AM Seitz Ludwig wrote: > Hello ACE, > > In order to move the discussion forward I decided to implement the changes > suggested by Steffi to address the comments raised by John. Thank you for > this contribution Steffi. This update also fixes two minor issues found by > Francesca (mismatches in datatypes between text and figures, see diff or > github for details). > > /Ludwig > > -----Original Message----- > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Sent: den 17 november 2020 08:28 > To: Hannes Tschofenig ; Seitz Ludwig < > ludwig.seitz@combitech.se>; Goeran Selander ; > Erik Wahlstroem ; Samuel Erdtman < > erdtman@spotify.com> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] New Version Notification for > draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36.txt > > > A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36.txt has been > successfully submitted by Ludwig Seitz and posted to the IETF repository. > > Name: draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz > Revision: 36 > Title: Authentication and Authorization for Constrained > Environments (ACE) using the OAuth 2.0 Framework (ACE-OAuth) > Document date: 2020-11-17 > Group: ace > Pages: 87 > URL: > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36.txt > Status: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz/ > Htmlized: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz > Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36 > Diff: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36 > > Abstract: > This specification defines a framework for authentication and > authorization in Internet of Things (IoT) environments called ACE- > OAuth. The framework is based on a set of building blocks including > OAuth 2.0 and the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP), thus > transforming a well-known and widely used authorization solution into > a form suitable for IoT devices. Existing specifications are used > where possible, but extensions are added and profiles are defined to > better serve the IoT use cases. > > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at > tools.ietf.org. > > The IETF Secretariat > > > _______________________________________________ > Ace mailing list > Ace@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace > -- Daniel Migault Ericsson --0000000000003b10f405b4491cc7 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks Ludwig,=C2=A0

I understand all c= oncerns=C2=A0have been addressed.=C2=A0

Yours,=C2= =A0
Daniel

On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 2:33 AM Seitz Ludwig <= ludwig.seitz@combitech.se&= gt; wrote:
Hello= ACE,

In order to move the discussion forward I decided to implement the changes = suggested by Steffi to address the comments raised by John. Thank you for t= his contribution Steffi. This update also fixes two minor issues found by F= rancesca (mismatches in datatypes between text and figures, see diff or git= hub for details).

/Ludwig

-----Original Message-----
From: interne= t-drafts@ietf.org <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
Sent: den 17 november 2020 08:28
To: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@arm.com>; Seitz Ludwig <ludwig.seitz@combit= ech.se>; Goeran Selander <goran.selander@ericsson.com>; Erik Wahlstr= oem <eri= k@wahlstromstekniska.se>; Samuel Erdtman <erdtman@spotify.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz= -36.txt


A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36.txt has been successful= ly submitted by Ludwig Seitz and posted to the IETF repository.

Name:=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz Revision:=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A036
Title:=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Authentication and Authorization f= or Constrained Environments (ACE) using the OAuth 2.0 Framework (ACE-OAuth)=
Document date:=C2=A0 2020-11-17
Group:=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ace
Pages:=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 87
URL:=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36.t= xt
Status:=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz/
Htmlized:=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz
Htmlized:=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0https:/= /tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-36
Diff:=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-= 36

Abstract:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0This specification defines a framework for authentication and<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0authorization in Internet of Things (IoT) environments called = ACE-
=C2=A0 =C2=A0OAuth.=C2=A0 The framework is based on a set of building block= s including
=C2=A0 =C2=A0OAuth 2.0 and the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP), thu= s
=C2=A0 =C2=A0transforming a well-known and widely used authorization soluti= on into
=C2=A0 =C2=A0a form suitable for IoT devices.=C2=A0 Existing specifications= are used
=C2=A0 =C2=A0where possible, but extensions are added and profiles are defi= ned to
=C2=A0 =C2=A0better serve the IoT use cases.




Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submissio= n until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat


_______________________________________________
Ace mailing list
Ace@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace


--
Daniel Migault
Ericsson
--0000000000003b10f405b4491cc7-- From nobody Tue Nov 17 15:01:35 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 931C33A0E8B for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:01:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cx6grApPAvLE for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:01:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C25A3A0E83 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:01:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com with SMTP id u24so12031036vsl.9 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:01:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+4VebrJ7BvuflIFJwxkQP5PUrZI0Ip9drsBHRriD3s4=; b=om7JHNWonEZXxzmwaWSDhyYlUtHelIGvoHWKDY2WFx5q39Fu3Q55TIk9pyo8DheB2x PQ5Fh3emAEAb+VDivXfQNvmVRdVGVeiQwX/1ol1R7p72bQ5u0LYWwWxheiHFG3i/Ohsu QT8QupNjfe+EfR+FKriTem3mzpiT5gY6D+HdawsqSSN6/OE7nP+YDCgQ3eCY16X9cHyy jptBKDlPPv98eNCJ321CYG+RdSnyP7/P1/PNhYUekZcnVzrvoUJEDfO601rB37lVQBjn crB+/96vpU1jDrRq8R9aWXj+uYZ/+1dI8iI6ExKrWMiu7/Dugsa5pf9Rz3Mzgsc1kXGl KFjw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+4VebrJ7BvuflIFJwxkQP5PUrZI0Ip9drsBHRriD3s4=; b=Gs/Ry8nXLyKm+r0oE+2K2vcijCOaYfC/G8mvN2OmqRAk9kpvVgQkO5XNU9x60alRnJ VKNLb8LuaY81/BOSVEtF2yJULv/bq63pCBfJS2IxnmCpkgk/vtpUddqyqBK+f/rLiCPs 072l42xLxJRTNwlv/YJ+g0wXFazoHTwBewr1q/4kA9dTil1e/CwfTQLvLjYscQtnzrgJ suIXJ/iP+Iq+7FQL2kDJaoO9jhdqbsbtPSHhMsyISxVRtDy8pYnItkXBEu2P7ZxXi0h6 wcbFq5l3a1fiCFw8uwwZpJ2BcK22DdNdKGRK1os+ZAfMR0UVp5598GMpwGvDGWFCUjij w05w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532U927rE77JSl7LMRBbQeJE/BzUTnnG6xvY1G6IeGft4ioRST2z /fSwSxz/+CyZDEzoXbZQ+Wz0IRdFKPDI3KRPY0KhiP4QQdw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJywl2XtThO9flsfnQNLrLD/wr8gS5ZnJyU9xYZmIqvJobZLYc5n5Gj9TBXO9yie3GfZpVPQpWjMS+35kPkiKN8= X-Received: by 2002:a67:80d7:: with SMTP id b206mr1552367vsd.30.1605654090437; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:01:30 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel Migault Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 18:01:19 -0500 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=B6ran_Selander?= Cc: Ace Wg Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b156fe05b45579f9" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:01:34 -0000 --000000000000b156fe05b45579f9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 5:05 AM G=C3=B6ran Selander wrote: > Hi Daniel, and all, > > > > Some comments on the proposed charter and your mail, sorry for late > response. > > > > 1. > > =E2=80=9DThe Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework a= nd > existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of > the framework for additional secure communications protocols=E2=80=9D > > > > I take it this text covers (should the WG want to adopt): > > > > - draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile > - an ACE-EDHOC profile (i.e. the POST /token response and the access > token provision information to support authentication with EDHOC, e.g.= raw > public key of the other party). Such a profile could provide good trus= t > management properties, potentially at the cost of a larger access toke= n etc. > > > My understanding is that it covers anything related to profiles. > > > 2. > > =E2=80=9DIn particular the discussion might revive a discussion that happ= ened in > 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired > work such as [3]. Please make this discussion constructive on this thread= . > =E2=80=9D > > > > As I remember it, the outcome of this discussion was =E2=80=93 in line wi= th the > mindset of EST =E2=80=93 that it is beneficial to re-use authentication a= nd > communication security appropriate for actual use case. If coaps is > suitable for a particular use case, then it makes sense to protect also t= he > enrolment procedure with this protocol. But whereas the security protocol > is coaps instead of https, the enrolment functionality and semantics shou= ld > reuse that of EST, possibly profiled for the new setting: [4]. > > > > In the same spirit there was support at the meeting [2] to specify > protection of EST payloads profiled for use with OSCORE as communication > security protocol, together with a suitable AKE for authentication. > Following the adoption of EDHOC in LAKE this work has now been revived [5= ]. > IMHO the reasoning above still makes sense. > > > > With this in mind, and taking into account recent discussion on the list, > perhaps this part of the charter: > > > > =E2=80=9DThe Working Group will standardize how to use Constrained Applic= ation > Protocol (CoAP) as a Transport Medium for the Certificate management > protocol version 2 (CMPv2). =E2=80=9D > > > > should be rephrased or complemented with the reasoning above, for example= : > > > > The scope of the Working Group includes profiles of the Enrolment over > Secure Transport (EST) transported with the Constrained Application > Protocol (CoAP)=E2=80=9D > Thanks for the clarification. I added some text to add EST profiles. > Thanks > > G=C3=B6ran > > > > [4] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-coap-est > > [5] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore > > > > > > > > > > On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" wrote: > > Hi, > > I would like to start the charter discussion. Here is a draft of a > proposed charter [1]. > > > > It seems to be that additional discussion is needed with regard to the > last paragraph related certificate management. In particular the discussi= on > might revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not > co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please ma= ke > this discussion constructive on this thread. > > > > The fundamental question is whether we need certificate management at thi= s > stage. If the answer is yes, and we have multiple proposals, it would be > good to clarify the position of the different proposals and evaluate > whether a selection is needed or not before validating the charter. > > > > Please provide your inputs on the mailing list before October 30. Of > course for minor edits, you may suggest them directly on the google doc. > > > > Yours, > > Daniel > > > > [1] > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBXh= oDiptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing > < > https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=3D4f3d9c3b-118c475b-4f3ddca0-86e223= 7f51fb-627e48b069462d70&q=3D1&e=3D6924b2a6-e7e5-4ec1-a1af-c94637953dc5&u=3D= https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8Du= BwPM2BnBXhoDiptY%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing> > > > [2] > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-interim-2017-ace-03-201710191300= / > > [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-selander-ace-eals/ > > > > -- > > Daniel Migault > > > > Ericsson > --=20 Daniel Migault Ericsson --000000000000b156fe05b45579f9 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 5:05 AM G=C3= =B6ran Selander <goran.se= lander@ericsson.com> wrote:

Hi Daniel, and all,<= /span>

=C2=A0

Some comments on the proposed c= harter and your mail, sorry for late response. =C2=A0<= /p>

=C2=A0

1.

=E2=80=9DThe Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and exist= ing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of the framew= ork for additional secure communications protocols=E2=80=9D

=C2=A0

I take it this text covers (sho= uld the WG want to adopt):

=C2=A0

  • draft-tiloca-ace-group-oscore-profile
  • an ACE-EDHOC p= rofile (i.e. the POST /token response and the access token provision inform= ation to support authentication with EDHOC, e.g. raw public key of the other party). Such a profile could provi= de good trust management properties, potentially at the cost of a larger ac= cess token etc.

=C2=A0

<= /div>
My understanding is that it covers anything related = to profiles.=C2=A0
<= div lang=3D"en-SE" style=3D"overflow-wrap: break-word;">

=C2=A0

2.

=E2=80=9DIn particular t= he discussion might revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I = was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Ple= ase make this discussion constructive on this thread.=E2=80=9D

=C2=A0

As I remember it, the outcome o= f this discussion was =E2=80=93 in line with the mindset of EST =E2=80=93 t= hat it is beneficial to re-use authentication and communication security ap= propriate for actual use case. If coaps is suitable for a particular use case, then it makes se= nse to protect also the enrolment procedure with this protocol. But whereas= the security protocol is coaps instead of https, the enrolment functionali= ty and semantics should reuse that of EST, possibly profiled for the new setting: [4]. <= /p>

=C2=A0

In the same spirit there was su= pport at the meeting [2] to specify protection of EST payloads profiled for= use with OSCORE as communication security protocol, together with a suitab= le AKE for authentication. Following the adoption of EDHOC in LAKE this work = has now been revived [5]. IMHO the reasoning above still makes sense.

=C2=A0

With this in mind, and taking i= nto account recent discussion on the list, perhaps this part of the charter= :

=C2=A0

=E2=80=9DThe Working Group will standardize how to use Constrained Application P= rotocol (CoAP) as a Transport Medium for the Certificate management protocol versi= on 2 (CMPv2).=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=E2=80=9D<= /span>

=C2=A0

should be rephrased or compleme= nted with the reasoning above, for example:

=C2=A0

The scope of the Working Group includes profiles of the Enrolment over S= ecure Transport (EST) transported with the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)=E2=80=9D


Thanks for the clarification. I added some text to add EST profiles.=

Thanks

G=C3=B6ran

=C2=A0

[4] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-= coap-est

[5] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-selander-ace-coap-est-oscore

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" <ace-bounces@ietf.org> wrote:<= /p>

Hi,

I would like to start the= charter discussion. Here is a draft of a proposed charter [1].

=C2=A0

It seems to be that addit= ional discussion is needed with regard to the last paragraph related certif= icate management. In particular the discussion might revive a discussion th= at happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please= make this discussion constructive on this thread.

=C2=A0

The fundamental question = is whether we need certificate management at this stage. If the answer is y= es, and we have multiple proposals, it would be good to clarify the positio= n of the different proposals and evaluate whether a selection is needed or not before validating the charter.

=C2=A0

Please provide your input= s on the mailing list before October 30. Of course for minor edits, you may= suggest them directly on the google doc.

=C2=A0

Yours,

Daniel

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

--

Daniel Migault<= /u>

=C2=A0

Ericsson



--
Daniel Migault
Ericsson
--000000000000b156fe05b45579f9-- From nobody Tue Nov 17 15:02:23 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 901523A0E8B for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:02:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M2wzQxUVvXAe for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:02:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vs1-xe2c.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 840DC3A0E83 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:02:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe2c.google.com with SMTP id f7so12034274vsh.10 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:02:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Fj/+JzImj7GPeJ2/mGr938UJWvkEFQCh4wSYRjyz+Sk=; b=L8SbLw3G7M/e8yUr58IIGfZUDbC8aw75+vvU8uWy7hlCkALgoWNBVtl0gAiP7KLt25 L4BHoowNIjvNtWPrlFQnCZiKuO7RX6iScUOwOY6O8Rr6BgymHzBPwURSXQ3VgqKrRAHT sivXG/vX3vtnh6VoLg1hdFhUtdnOQcpN97x3WC4Z6y1XgRk8AoY1Mu2D0TD7WRC2JYv5 +bbXn+EEHyiAL2GI+++/xsZX310cjZjBcxBGwBsnE64ClG0EPAVgbBUbGAnmfCkdruqy 7ElpVMrGZxy6dkxhVXVb//xIff4DFW1Jiw8/iJ0ZC3knmzUW8pgCQeYoTJE73ul6XRjO 5/xQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Fj/+JzImj7GPeJ2/mGr938UJWvkEFQCh4wSYRjyz+Sk=; b=IfG7SdrJw1D0NrDnp3qpx4bNb4kzJaz6qoBXUNBCxh8hWRdYZzxolFDKCrxyXNgEWr +jsd0Ge5AWeHwZ/QnjUYkt3IU2BtpEaySKGgs5UHgmidkRNL3wrx1Fqf8A/EjWpjdy5a 91wYZu7ylmZrOIx9podfEjph4xEKwwyQFxvn01tLLH1D6cVLaKzg4EOxKVPWQex6xGse slcY5krcEFK25rMpOT9ovi3BhHTUIa0n3xgu/c9JVANUGHk0o1NpimGQM2AxuFTJ1J6T HC1m9rpEE3jyIjrlOeAeirkYM1KW648IRHHWY0o0pmBvIdM7sYL6maxEy/71rmXLHaAU qkhQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533ROAT1Y11yatC3ztoRJAOCanDoIc7Fa7OUUNpIxLHpnRt9/iuJ QYCY1iwhar9HHiqsfP0mUzd1MUSTJIP+ta5hkju9n2NAh2Y7KA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyGxl8PC8bu3cx68qQFwGEC7pjrWgKku5g6WwzsCU072xi1msi1U+tRLz5ndCnrR51+SmOtbIzzKql2SuhJx7w= X-Received: by 2002:a67:6981:: with SMTP id e123mr1678434vsc.40.1605654138511; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:02:18 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel Migault Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 18:02:07 -0500 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=B6ran_Selander?= Cc: Ace Wg Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008ee5d405b4557c8e" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:02:22 -0000 --0000000000008ee5d405b4557c8e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Goran, I added the text to the charter we will discuss later. Yours, Daniel On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 10:26 AM G=C3=B6ran Selander wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > > > Here=E2=80=99s another input to the charter. > > > > The current group key management solutions addresses the problem of > authorized access to group keys and public keys of group members. > > > > A related problem is authorized access of public keys of other devices no= t > necessarily part of a security group, in the sense of sharing a symmetric > key used to protect group messages. > > > > Authorized access to raw public keys serves an important function in > constrained settings where public key certificates may not be feasible du= e > to the incurred overhead, e.g. for when authenticating using EDHOC > (draft-ietf-lake-edhoc). > > This functionality is thus a subset of what is already supported, but > since the current solution is geared towards groups a different solution > may be needed (although it is probably possible to reuse parts from the > existing schemes for provisioning and requesting public keys). > > > > With this in mind, I propose the following change (highlighted in boldfac= e > below): > > > > OLD > > The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and > existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of > the framework for additional secure communications protocols (that are no= t > necessarily limited to constrained endpoints, though the focus remains on > deployment ecosystems with a substantial portion of constrained devices). > > > > NEW > > The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and > existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of > the framework for additional secure communications protocols *and **for > additional **support services **providing* *authorized access to crypto* = *keys > *(that are not necessarily limited to constrained endpoints, though the > focus remains on deployment ecosystems with a substantial portion of > constrained devices). > > > > G=C3=B6ran > > > > > > > > On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" wrote: > > Hi, > > I would like to start the charter discussion. Here is a draft of a > proposed charter [1]. > > > > It seems to be that additional discussion is needed with regard to the > last paragraph related certificate management. In particular the discussi= on > might revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not > co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please ma= ke > this discussion constructive on this thread. > > > > The fundamental question is whether we need certificate management at thi= s > stage. If the answer is yes, and we have multiple proposals, it would be > good to clarify the position of the different proposals and evaluate > whether a selection is needed or not before validating the charter. > > > > Please provide your inputs on the mailing list before October 30. Of > course for minor edits, you may suggest them directly on the google doc. > > > > Yours, > > Daniel > > > > [1] > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBXh= oDiptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing > < > https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=3D4f3d9c3b-118c475b-4f3ddca0-86e223= 7f51fb-627e48b069462d70&q=3D1&e=3D6924b2a6-e7e5-4ec1-a1af-c94637953dc5&u=3D= https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8Du= BwPM2BnBXhoDiptY%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing> > > > [2] > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-interim-2017-ace-03-201710191300= / > > [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-selander-ace-eals/ > > > > -- > > Daniel Migault > > > > Ericsson > --=20 Daniel Migault Ericsson --0000000000008ee5d405b4557c8e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Goran,=C2=A0

I added the text = to the charter we will discuss later.=C2=A0

Yours,=C2=A0=
Daniel

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 10:26 AM G=C3=B6ran Selander <goran.selander@ericsson.com> wrote:

Hi Daniel,=

=C2=A0

Here=E2=80=99s another input to= the charter.

=C2=A0

The current group key management solutions addres= ses the problem of authorized access to group keys and public keys of group= members.

=C2=A0

A related problem is authorized access of public = keys of other devices not necessarily part of a security group, in the sens= e of sharing a symmetric key used to protect group messages.

=C2=A0

Authorized access to raw public keys serves an im= portant function in constrained settings where public key certificates may = not be feasible due to the incurred overhead, e.g. for when authenticating using EDHOC (draft-ietf-lake-edhoc)= .

This functionality is thus a subset of what is al= ready supported, but since the current solution is geared towards groups a = different solution may be needed (although it is probably possible to reuse parts from the existing schemes for provi= sioning and requesting public keys).

=C2=A0

With this in mind, I propose th= e following change (highlighted in boldface below):

=C2=A0

OLD=

The Working Group is charged with maint= enance of the framework and existing profiles thereof, and may undertake wo= rk to specify profiles of the framework for additional secure communications protocols (that are not necessarily limited to const= rained endpoints, though the focus remains on deployment ecosystems with a = substantial portion of constrained devices).

=C2=A0=

NEW

The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framewo= rk and existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profile= s of the framework for additional secure communications protocols and for additional support services providing authorized access to crypto= keys (that are not necessarily limited to constrained end= points, though the focus remains on deployment ecosystems with a substantia= l portion of constrained devices).

=C2=A0

G=C3=B6ran

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" <ace-bounces@ietf.org> wrote:<= /p>

Hi,

I would like to start the= charter discussion. Here is a draft of a proposed charter [1].

=C2=A0

It seems to be that addit= ional discussion is needed with regard to the last paragraph related certif= icate management. In particular the discussion might revive a discussion th= at happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please= make this discussion constructive on this thread.

=C2=A0

The fundamental question = is whether we need certificate management at this stage. If the answer is y= es, and we have multiple proposals, it would be good to clarify the positio= n of the different proposals and evaluate whether a selection is needed or not before validating the charter.

=C2=A0

Please provide your input= s on the mailing list before October 30. Of course for minor edits, you may= suggest them directly on the google doc.

=C2=A0

Yours,

Daniel

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

--

Daniel Migault<= /u>

=C2=A0

Ericsson



--
Daniel Migault
Ericsson
--0000000000008ee5d405b4557c8e-- From nobody Tue Nov 17 15:17:04 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A0533A0F35 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:17:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rqQ6MOYv2RkF for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:17:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ua1-x92c.google.com (mail-ua1-x92c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::92c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E13C03A0F41 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:17:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ua1-x92c.google.com with SMTP id p12so58959uam.1 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:17:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=axNbNF6/hm0hAnaFxI7tl0PyqD0lE4ZQY2P+2Dz9nUY=; b=swiJnC6LDFIKAJVRdusGYBxyrM+OitL5UH41H7tcl4pk9o0+j0uv4N1vCLStRM4p24 2FAx+XL3JPsXAX0zEXA/G4jD18KQ6Y5mTG/WcnqVo7QFcJCmfyWk6S9N/PpZlOVUViw3 bJuR81XQJzLigKvkNaIuRsMUjW6f0tO0CZxultakZ4q0Gyxv1L9oN+ZfsA38tc2PbnD6 +pihb2QgqpTqTs0DDHtN0UCAof00uneLHNkQYXccCgy1aL2elc934lJjvT6iw0bsyCHN 7wTbrTxhnP0XdTt5x3026uu+mnp/WGrYQRqDk8jFQMSZGbRDnroQ+GmaCkkGqt0iqmKA MTVA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=axNbNF6/hm0hAnaFxI7tl0PyqD0lE4ZQY2P+2Dz9nUY=; b=THZ2xFrrKnR9VuoQMf/iEXIdObpbdQmF+6Rt6vk3rB/JS6q5OFyvY2vXAhyPpbdCEg j17DMeUietFC/fvDR/odzmFif2x8rUp5ZtTnRL1ISbmdJD6jWwsUylyps/3YyxNHBssi BmoFGEhVs79zEWa4APDifp3/PXu09RIpVvuNl0jAwvaN6SQk1by9CdydcH75lOs3Q3bT Gw/scs4IDw3B42FbxI+LPEEUAzwIwsXP952cNTDgz87vEkuZ/PNt0rkJ6smg8iczP7gN crP2XR//4BB7wAhJ/l+8G5GeVNVip/Kl2Lv5QBNQat3Ab6tsFguhk27Pvmj+v8mtr7h2 DrkQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530XuNM0veW3dCY9I/pSUdbc9bm8GKKCRcFc1gJ9qiUJHRniWwQP Fbz6qe9S1JR8aw7OhJ1cSK+Pa2KKLMK36jePPTVSEl2CSMTLfrkh X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwdEgePnwcLJTeb10Lc6mdnbCtvYugmjTVezk0fpOa6TGOhnHKPmcKpp7GXJglCnFOuUSq7HvFsza8yuekoERo= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:5a10:: with SMTP id l16mr1656991uad.0.1605655019895; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:16:59 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Daniel Migault Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 18:16:48 -0500 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=B6ran_Selander?= Cc: Ace Wg Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000017be8805b455b1ae" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:17:03 -0000 --00000000000017be8805b455b1ae Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thank you all for the feed backs. For the purpose of driving the charter discussion at the IETf 109, I have added the comments into the proposed text [1]. My current understanding is that it seems beneficial to add CMPv2 over CoAP in the charter. I am happy to be contradicted. * I have not seen a clear cut to do one or the other. * EST and CMPv2 are two protocols that can be used for enrollment or cert management while addressing different cases / needs / situations -- maybe we can clarify that point. I can see leveraging the existing CMP infrastructure, but it seems that is not the only one. * I am not convinced that not having CMP over CoAP will not prevent its deployment and as such I prefer to have it standardized - this might be a personal thought. * Adding any piece of work require cycles, but it seems to me that CPM will not have a major impact on the WG progress. The work will probably include other WG such a LAMPS. Yours, Daniel [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBXhoD= iptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 6:02 PM Daniel Migault wrote: > Hi Goran, > > I added the text to the charter we will discuss later. > > Yours, > Daniel > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 10:26 AM G=C3=B6ran Selander < > goran.selander@ericsson.com> wrote: > >> Hi Daniel, >> >> >> >> Here=E2=80=99s another input to the charter. >> >> >> >> The current group key management solutions addresses the problem of >> authorized access to group keys and public keys of group members. >> >> >> >> A related problem is authorized access of public keys of other devices >> not necessarily part of a security group, in the sense of sharing a >> symmetric key used to protect group messages. >> >> >> >> Authorized access to raw public keys serves an important function in >> constrained settings where public key certificates may not be feasible d= ue >> to the incurred overhead, e.g. for when authenticating using EDHOC >> (draft-ietf-lake-edhoc). >> >> This functionality is thus a subset of what is already supported, but >> since the current solution is geared towards groups a different solution >> may be needed (although it is probably possible to reuse parts from the >> existing schemes for provisioning and requesting public keys). >> >> >> >> With this in mind, I propose the following change (highlighted in >> boldface below): >> >> >> >> OLD >> >> The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and >> existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of >> the framework for additional secure communications protocols (that are n= ot >> necessarily limited to constrained endpoints, though the focus remains o= n >> deployment ecosystems with a substantial portion of constrained devices)= . >> >> >> >> NEW >> >> The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and >> existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of >> the framework for additional secure communications protocols *and **for >> additional **support services **providing* *authorized access to crypto*= *keys >> *(that are not necessarily limited to constrained endpoints, though the >> focus remains on deployment ecosystems with a substantial portion of >> constrained devices). >> >> >> >> G=C3=B6ran >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I would like to start the charter discussion. Here is a draft of a >> proposed charter [1]. >> >> >> >> It seems to be that additional discussion is needed with regard to the >> last paragraph related certificate management. In particular the discuss= ion >> might revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not >> co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please m= ake >> this discussion constructive on this thread. >> >> >> >> The fundamental question is whether we need certificate management at >> this stage. If the answer is yes, and we have multiple proposals, it wou= ld >> be good to clarify the position of the different proposals and evaluate >> whether a selection is needed or not before validating the charter. >> >> >> >> Please provide your inputs on the mailing list before October 30. Of >> course for minor edits, you may suggest them directly on the google doc. >> >> >> >> Yours, >> >> Daniel >> >> >> >> [1] >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBX= hoDiptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing >> < >> https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=3D4f3d9c3b-118c475b-4f3ddca0-86e22= 37f51fb-627e48b069462d70&q=3D1&e=3D6924b2a6-e7e5-4ec1-a1af-c94637953dc5&u= =3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR= 8DuBwPM2BnBXhoDiptY%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing> >> >> >> [2] >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-interim-2017-ace-03-20171019130= 0/ >> >> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-selander-ace-eals/ >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Daniel Migault >> >> >> >> Ericsson >> > > > -- > Daniel Migault > Ericsson > --=20 Daniel Migault Ericsson --00000000000017be8805b455b1ae Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thank you all for the feed backs. For the purpose of drivi= ng the charter discussion at the IETf 109, I have added the comments into t= he proposed text [1].=C2=A0

My current understanding is = that it seems beneficial to add CMPv2 over CoAP in the charter. I am happy = to be contradicted.
* I have not seen a clear= cut to do one or the other.
* EST and CMPv2 are two protocol= s that can be used for enrollment or cert management while addressing diffe= rent cases / needs / situations -- maybe we can clarify that point. I can s= ee leveraging the existing CMP infrastructure, but it seems that is not the= only one.
* I am not convinced that not having CMP over CoAP will not p= revent its deployment and as such I prefer to have it standardized - this m= ight be a personal thought.
* Adding any piece of work require cycles, = but it seems to me that CPM will not have a major impact on the WG progress= . The work will probably include other WG such a LAMPS.=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0<= br>
Yours,=C2=A0
Daniel

=

= On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 6:02 PM Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Goran,=C2=A0

I added the text to the charter we will discuss later.=C2= =A0

Yours,=C2=A0
Daniel

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at = 10:26 AM G=C3=B6ran Selander <goran.selander@ericsson.com> wrote:
=

Hi Daniel,=

=C2=A0

Here=E2=80=99s another input to= the charter.

=C2=A0

The current group key management solutions addres= ses the problem of authorized access to group keys and public keys of group= members.

=C2=A0

A related problem is authorized access of public = keys of other devices not necessarily part of a security group, in the sens= e of sharing a symmetric key used to protect group messages.

=C2=A0

Authorized access to raw public keys serves an im= portant function in constrained settings where public key certificates may = not be feasible due to the incurred overhead, e.g. for when authenticating using EDHOC (draft-ietf-lake-edhoc)= .

This functionality is thus a subset of what is al= ready supported, but since the current solution is geared towards groups a = different solution may be needed (although it is probably possible to reuse parts from the existing schemes for provi= sioning and requesting public keys).

=C2=A0

With this in mind, I propose th= e following change (highlighted in boldface below):

=C2=A0

OLD=

The Working Group is charged with maint= enance of the framework and existing profiles thereof, and may undertake wo= rk to specify profiles of the framework for additional secure communications protocols (that are not necessarily limited to const= rained endpoints, though the focus remains on deployment ecosystems with a = substantial portion of constrained devices).

=C2=A0=

NEW

The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framewo= rk and existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profile= s of the framework for additional secure communications protocols and for additional support services providing authorized access to crypto= keys (that are not necessarily limited to constrained end= points, though the focus remains on deployment ecosystems with a substantia= l portion of constrained devices).

=C2=A0

G=C3=B6ran

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" <ace-bounces@ietf.org> wrote:<= /p>

Hi,

I would like to start the= charter discussion. Here is a draft of a proposed charter [1].

=C2=A0

It seems to be that addit= ional discussion is needed with regard to the last paragraph related certif= icate management. In particular the discussion might revive a discussion th= at happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please= make this discussion constructive on this thread.

=C2=A0

The fundamental question = is whether we need certificate management at this stage. If the answer is y= es, and we have multiple proposals, it would be good to clarify the positio= n of the different proposals and evaluate whether a selection is needed or not before validating the charter.

=C2=A0

Please provide your input= s on the mailing list before October 30. Of course for minor edits, you may= suggest them directly on the google doc.

=C2=A0

Yours,

Daniel

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

--

Daniel Migault<= /u>

=C2=A0

Ericsson



--
Daniel Migault
Ericsson


--
Daniel Migault
Ericsson
--00000000000017be8805b455b1ae-- From nobody Tue Nov 17 15:47:12 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 645253A1044 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:47:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rKVcXc-sHKXg for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:47:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0842D3A1033 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:47:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from kduck.mit.edu ([24.16.140.251]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 0AHNl1d7005173 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 17 Nov 2020 18:47:05 -0500 Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:47:00 -0800 From: Benjamin Kaduk To: Daniel Migault Cc: Ace Wg Message-ID: <20201117234700.GR39170@kduck.mit.edu> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] Charter discussion X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:47:10 -0000 Thanks for updating the draft charter at [1], Daniel! I note that Michael raised the question of whether some other group might also be interested in working on CMP-over-coap, so the IESG will be sure to discuss that if CMP is still in the draft ACE charter when it goes to the IESG for review. -Ben On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 06:16:48PM -0500, Daniel Migault wrote: > Thank you all for the feed backs. For the purpose of driving the charter > discussion at the IETf 109, I have added the comments into the proposed > text [1]. > > My current understanding is that it seems beneficial to add CMPv2 over CoAP > in the charter. I am happy to be contradicted. > * I have not seen a clear cut to do one or the other. > * EST and CMPv2 are two protocols that can be used for enrollment or cert > management while addressing different cases / needs / situations -- maybe > we can clarify that point. I can see leveraging the existing CMP > infrastructure, but it seems that is not the only one. > * I am not convinced that not having CMP over CoAP will not prevent its > deployment and as such I prefer to have it standardized - this might be a > personal thought. > * Adding any piece of work require cycles, but it seems to me that CPM will > not have a major impact on the WG progress. The work will probably include > other WG such a LAMPS. > > Yours, > Daniel > > [1] > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBXhoDiptY/edit?usp=sharing > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 6:02 PM Daniel Migault wrote: > > > Hi Goran, > > > > I added the text to the charter we will discuss later. > > > > Yours, > > Daniel > > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 10:26 AM Göran Selander < > > goran.selander@ericsson.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Daniel, > >> > >> > >> > >> Here’s another input to the charter. > >> > >> > >> > >> The current group key management solutions addresses the problem of > >> authorized access to group keys and public keys of group members. > >> > >> > >> > >> A related problem is authorized access of public keys of other devices > >> not necessarily part of a security group, in the sense of sharing a > >> symmetric key used to protect group messages. > >> > >> > >> > >> Authorized access to raw public keys serves an important function in > >> constrained settings where public key certificates may not be feasible due > >> to the incurred overhead, e.g. for when authenticating using EDHOC > >> (draft-ietf-lake-edhoc). > >> > >> This functionality is thus a subset of what is already supported, but > >> since the current solution is geared towards groups a different solution > >> may be needed (although it is probably possible to reuse parts from the > >> existing schemes for provisioning and requesting public keys). > >> > >> > >> > >> With this in mind, I propose the following change (highlighted in > >> boldface below): > >> > >> > >> > >> OLD > >> > >> The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and > >> existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of > >> the framework for additional secure communications protocols (that are not > >> necessarily limited to constrained endpoints, though the focus remains on > >> deployment ecosystems with a substantial portion of constrained devices). > >> > >> > >> > >> NEW > >> > >> The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and > >> existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of > >> the framework for additional secure communications protocols *and **for > >> additional **support services **providing* *authorized access to crypto* *keys > >> *(that are not necessarily limited to constrained endpoints, though the > >> focus remains on deployment ecosystems with a substantial portion of > >> constrained devices). > >> > >> > >> > >> Göran > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I would like to start the charter discussion. Here is a draft of a > >> proposed charter [1]. > >> > >> > >> > >> It seems to be that additional discussion is needed with regard to the > >> last paragraph related certificate management. In particular the discussion > >> might revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not > >> co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. Please make > >> this discussion constructive on this thread. > >> > >> > >> > >> The fundamental question is whether we need certificate management at > >> this stage. If the answer is yes, and we have multiple proposals, it would > >> be good to clarify the position of the different proposals and evaluate > >> whether a selection is needed or not before validating the charter. > >> > >> > >> > >> Please provide your inputs on the mailing list before October 30. Of > >> course for minor edits, you may suggest them directly on the google doc. > >> > >> > >> > >> Yours, > >> > >> Daniel > >> > >> > >> > >> [1] > >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBXhoDiptY/edit?usp=sharing > >> < > >> https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=4f3d9c3b-118c475b-4f3ddca0-86e2237f51fb-627e48b069462d70&q=1&e=6924b2a6-e7e5-4ec1-a1af-c94637953dc5&u=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBXhoDiptY%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing> > >> > >> > >> [2] > >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-interim-2017-ace-03-201710191300/ > >> > >> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-selander-ace-eals/ > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Daniel Migault > >> > >> > >> > >> Ericsson > >> > > > > > > -- > > Daniel Migault > > Ericsson > > > > > -- > Daniel Migault > Ericsson > _______________________________________________ > Ace mailing list > Ace@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace From nobody Tue Nov 17 23:09:02 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00EC43A0C17 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:09:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.087 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.087 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n7Jtvc1an2I3 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:08:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vs1-xe35.google.com (mail-vs1-xe35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C8233A0C18 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:08:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe35.google.com with SMTP id y73so435395vsc.5 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:08:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=AekDmPsucK1Cr6Wl989IVQkPFP3u7b/El96cFR3nXiQ=; b=u0hM/zj0aDkl/+D7E+iQQXveKMeVWAy9eFsaLNQ83mPJPmcq3FKnHBhNpk9Wm+Lst7 XuKJVMZo9MuAvvVgsmFdjeUGwFYkVdIEEcu6+Uj0Ue5n+HeTIbx6EiGeYo4L/j5XpDYy JwCHjNEIugQS72Df7ixreZ3xWo76TPlfypzPs5ch6uEv1ZoHHhEjX6T8meRakoil87qB qnZYbgI8nwvH0lrxDC0etOCEk4CwIFWIUFElrClbNK2Ol+lHYOgLTiRECrU+cnRX2GWw lFuxwFRShBqj6TpYo/s+Wl1lcsOE8I77uPRg2A6E++7Ha258THcQPQ/9z55UPGMLuTiG jjZQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=AekDmPsucK1Cr6Wl989IVQkPFP3u7b/El96cFR3nXiQ=; b=OWA8cHPDT6/yGg1ag3C13lYlFDWHYgBlMgeOYg33Vy11Sd81f3idempDIHDKwJJGrv 40zWfrKKpblHUlfeofE6k2hEHEOubA7uePXw4G7UQpHK4PuFXe2lawX6JlD37J7skaI7 TuEy25SX/SnhUXsQiPpHPvmNoPSvzlDq8/qmPNLVJ+5y1I3Zm5SkebbcAJRuSVAQXoTm cCpPJol1cdjU6hK1t9qpTTelVxsqns2cKA5/r6BgavVIPjhpT9FaX3hfjLYzGVAKH7e1 bi7nehKxQhLK5b5HhoKm1X/aW+QYwhRLsF3KHuVaKJSejhxGFNV9PSOhXxW1cPhF2QrO tBwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5325E2+PchDM6Qp40Othl8hndGjg8lBwov5P1dwVvj2MJKcrWhP2 7/xUf8p5a1HOjoB3zHW803ljelcfP/m/B9fthII+MO471QQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz1Mu091hPQHDoS/BQdw9zJtrHmEp9J6toKs2ngMcQ1l0W5vDpDO3wWDDSTIRM/93y4zzDxTUsovqDVsgBpoCY= X-Received: by 2002:a67:fc87:: with SMTP id x7mr2191343vsp.56.1605683337217; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:08:57 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201117234700.GR39170@kduck.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <20201117234700.GR39170@kduck.mit.edu> From: Daniel Migault Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 02:08:46 -0500 Message-ID: To: Ace Wg Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000efca5a05b45c4801" Archived-At: Subject: [Ace] Proposed charter for ACE X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:09:01 -0000 --000000000000efca5a05b45c4801 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Please find the proposed charter we agreed on during the interim meeting. If you would like to propose any change, please use the following URL by November 25: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBXhoD= iptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing Yours, Daniel The Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments (ace) WG has defined a standardized solution framework for authentication and authorization to enable authorized access to resources identified by a URI and hosted on a resource server in constrained environments. The access to the resource is mediated by an authorization server, which is not considered to be constrained. Profiles of this framework for application to security protocols commonly used in constrained environments, including CoAP+DTLS and CoAP+OSCORE, have also been standardized. The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles of the framework for additional secure communications protocols and for additional support services providing authorized access to crypto keys (that are not necessarily limited to constrained endpoints, though the focus remains on deployment in ecosystems with a substantial portion of constrained devices). In addition to the ongoing maintenance work, the Working Group will extend the framework as needed for applicability to group communications, with initial focus on (D)TLS and (Group) OSCORE as the underlying group communication security protocols. The Working Group will standardize procedures for requesting and distributing group keying material using the ACE framework as well as appropriated management interfaces. The Working Group will standardize a format for expressing authorization information for a given authenticated principal as received from an authorization manager. The Working Group will examine how to use Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) as a transport medium for certificate enrollment protocols, such as EST and CMPv2, and standardize as needed. On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 6:47 PM Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > Thanks for updating the draft charter at [1], Daniel! > > I note that Michael raised the question of whether some other group might > also be interested in working on CMP-over-coap, so the IESG will be sure = to > discuss that if CMP is still in the draft ACE charter when it goes to the > IESG for review. > > -Ben > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 06:16:48PM -0500, Daniel Migault wrote: > > Thank you all for the feed backs. For the purpose of driving the charte= r > > discussion at the IETf 109, I have added the comments into the proposed > > text [1]. > > > > My current understanding is that it seems beneficial to add CMPv2 over > CoAP > > in the charter. I am happy to be contradicted. > > * I have not seen a clear cut to do one or the other. > > * EST and CMPv2 are two protocols that can be used for enrollment or ce= rt > > management while addressing different cases / needs / situations -- may= be > > we can clarify that point. I can see leveraging the existing CMP > > infrastructure, but it seems that is not the only one. > > * I am not convinced that not having CMP over CoAP will not prevent its > > deployment and as such I prefer to have it standardized - this might be= a > > personal thought. > > * Adding any piece of work require cycles, but it seems to me that CPM > will > > not have a major impact on the WG progress. The work will probably > include > > other WG such a LAMPS. > > > > Yours, > > Daniel > > > > [1] > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBXh= oDiptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing > > > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 6:02 PM Daniel Migault > wrote: > > > > > Hi Goran, > > > > > > I added the text to the charter we will discuss later. > > > > > > Yours, > > > Daniel > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 10:26 AM G=C3=B6ran Selander < > > > goran.selander@ericsson.com> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Daniel, > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Here=E2=80=99s another input to the charter. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> The current group key management solutions addresses the problem of > > >> authorized access to group keys and public keys of group members. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> A related problem is authorized access of public keys of other devic= es > > >> not necessarily part of a security group, in the sense of sharing a > > >> symmetric key used to protect group messages. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Authorized access to raw public keys serves an important function in > > >> constrained settings where public key certificates may not be > feasible due > > >> to the incurred overhead, e.g. for when authenticating using EDHOC > > >> (draft-ietf-lake-edhoc). > > >> > > >> This functionality is thus a subset of what is already supported, bu= t > > >> since the current solution is geared towards groups a different > solution > > >> may be needed (although it is probably possible to reuse parts from > the > > >> existing schemes for provisioning and requesting public keys). > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> With this in mind, I propose the following change (highlighted in > > >> boldface below): > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> OLD > > >> > > >> The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and > > >> existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profile= s > of > > >> the framework for additional secure communications protocols (that > are not > > >> necessarily limited to constrained endpoints, though the focus > remains on > > >> deployment ecosystems with a substantial portion of constrained > devices). > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> NEW > > >> > > >> The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framework and > > >> existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profile= s > of > > >> the framework for additional secure communications protocols *and > **for > > >> additional **support services **providing* *authorized access to > crypto* *keys > > >> *(that are not necessarily limited to constrained endpoints, though > the > > >> focus remains on deployment ecosystems with a substantial portion of > > >> constrained devices). > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> G=C3=B6ran > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> I would like to start the charter discussion. Here is a draft of a > > >> proposed charter [1]. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> It seems to be that additional discussion is needed with regard to t= he > > >> last paragraph related certificate management. In particular the > discussion > > >> might revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I was not > > >> co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3]. > Please make > > >> this discussion constructive on this thread. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> The fundamental question is whether we need certificate management a= t > > >> this stage. If the answer is yes, and we have multiple proposals, it > would > > >> be good to clarify the position of the different proposals and > evaluate > > >> whether a selection is needed or not before validating the charter. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Please provide your inputs on the mailing list before October 30. Of > > >> course for minor edits, you may suggest them directly on the google > doc. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Yours, > > >> > > >> Daniel > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> [1] > > >> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBXh= oDiptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing > > >> < > > >> > https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=3D4f3d9c3b-118c475b-4f3ddca0-86e223= 7f51fb-627e48b069462d70&q=3D1&e=3D6924b2a6-e7e5-4ec1-a1af-c94637953dc5&u=3D= https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8Du= BwPM2BnBXhoDiptY%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing > > > > >> > > >> > > >> [2] > > >> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-interim-2017-ace-03-201710191300= / > > >> > > >> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-selander-ace-eals/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> > > >> Daniel Migault > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Ericsson > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Daniel Migault > > > Ericsson > > > > > > > > > -- > > Daniel Migault > > Ericsson > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ace mailing list > > Ace@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace > > _______________________________________________ > Ace mailing list > Ace@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace > --=20 Daniel Migault Ericsson --000000000000efca5a05b45c4801 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,=C2=A0

Please find = the proposed charter we agreed on during the interim meeting. If you would = like to propose any change, please use the following URL by November 25:


Yours,=C2=A0
Daniel
<= br>

The Authent= ication and Authorization for Constrained Environments (ace) WG has defined= a standardized solution framework for authentication and authorization to = enable authorized access to resources identified by a URI and hosted on a r= esource server in constrained environments.=C2=A0

The access to the resource is mediated b= y an authorization server, which is not considered to be constrained.


Profiles of this= framework for application to security protocols commonly used in constrain= ed environments, including CoAP+DTLS and CoAP+OSCORE, have also been standa= rdized.=C2=A0 The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framewor= k and existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify profiles= of the framework for additional secure communications protocols and for additional support services providing authorized = access to crypto keys (that are not necessarily limited to constrained endpoints, though the = focus remains on deployment in ecosystems with a substantial portion of con= strained devices).


In addition to the ongoing maintenance work, the Working Group will= extend the framework as needed for applicability to group communications, = with initial focus on (D)TLS and (Group) OSCORE as the underlying group com= munication security protocols. The Working Group will standardize procedure= s for requesting and distributing group keying material using the ACE frame= work as well as appropriated management interfaces.=C2=A0


The Working Group will stand= ardize a format for expressing authorization information for a given authen= ticated principal as received from an authorization manager.=C2=A0

The Working Group w= ill examine how to use Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) as a transpo= rt medium for certificate enrollment protocols, such as EST and CMPv2, and = standardize as needed.



On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 6= :47 PM Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> wrote:
Tha= nks for updating the draft charter at [1], Daniel!

I note that Michael raised the question of whether some other group might also be interested in working on CMP-over-coap, so the IESG will be sure to=
discuss that if CMP is still in the draft ACE charter when it goes to the IESG for review.

-Ben

On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 06:16:48PM -0500, Daniel Migault wrote:
> Thank you all for the feed backs. For the purpose of driving the chart= er
> discussion at the IETf 109, I have added the comments into the propose= d
> text [1].
>
> My current understanding is that it seems beneficial to add CMPv2 over= CoAP
> in the charter. I am happy to be contradicted.
> * I have not seen a clear cut to do one or the other.
> * EST and CMPv2 are two protocols that can be used for enrollment or c= ert
> management while addressing different cases / needs / situations -- ma= ybe
> we can clarify that point. I can see leveraging the existing CMP
> infrastructure, but it seems that is not the only one.
> * I am not convinced that not having CMP over CoAP will not prevent it= s
> deployment and as such I prefer to have it standardized - this might b= e a
> personal thought.
> * Adding any piece of work require cycles, but it seems to me that CPM= will
> not have a major impact on the WG progress. The work will probably inc= lude
> other WG such a LAMPS.
>
> Yours,
> Daniel
>
> [1]
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBX= hoDiptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 6:02 PM Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: >
> > Hi Goran,
> >
> > I added the text to the charter we will discuss later.
> >
> > Yours,
> > Daniel
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 10:26 AM G=C3=B6ran Selander <
> > = goran.selander@ericsson.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Daniel,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Here=E2=80=99s another input to the charter.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> The current group key management solutions addresses the prob= lem of
> >> authorized access to group keys and public keys of group memb= ers.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> A related problem is authorized access of public keys of othe= r devices
> >> not necessarily part of a security group, in the sense of sha= ring a
> >> symmetric key used to protect group messages.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Authorized access to raw public keys serves an important func= tion in
> >> constrained settings where public key certificates may not be= feasible due
> >> to the incurred overhead, e.g. for when authenticating using = EDHOC
> >> (draft-ietf-lake-edhoc).
> >>
> >> This functionality is thus a subset of what is already suppor= ted, but
> >> since the current solution is geared towards groups a differe= nt solution
> >> may be needed (although it is probably possible to reuse part= s from the
> >> existing schemes for provisioning and requesting public keys)= .
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> With this in mind, I propose the following change (highlighte= d in
> >> boldface below):
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> OLD
> >>
> >> The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framewor= k and
> >> existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify = profiles of
> >> the framework for additional secure communications protocols = (that are not
> >> necessarily limited to constrained endpoints, though the focu= s remains on
> >> deployment ecosystems with a substantial portion of constrain= ed devices).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> NEW
> >>
> >> The Working Group is charged with maintenance of the framewor= k and
> >> existing profiles thereof, and may undertake work to specify = profiles of
> >> the framework for additional secure communications protocols = *and **for
> >> additional **support services **providing* *authorized access= to crypto* *keys
> >> *(that are not necessarily limited to constrained endpoints, = though the
> >> focus remains on deployment ecosystems with a substantial por= tion of
> >> constrained devices).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> G=C3=B6ran
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2020-10-15, 19:50, "Ace" <ace-bounces@ietf.org> wrote:<= br> > >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I would like to start the charter discussion. Here is a draft= of a
> >> proposed charter [1].
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> It seems to be that additional discussion is needed with rega= rd to the
> >> last paragraph related certificate management. In particular = the discussion
> >> might revive a discussion that happened in 2017 [2] - when I = was not
> >> co-chair of ACE -and considered other expired work such as [3= ]. Please make
> >> this discussion constructive on this thread.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> The fundamental question is whether we need certificate manag= ement at
> >> this stage. If the answer is yes, and we have multiple propos= als, it would
> >> be good to clarify the position of the different proposals an= d evaluate
> >> whether a selection is needed or not before validating the ch= arter.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Please provide your inputs on the mailing list before October= 30. Of
> >> course for minor edits, you may suggest them directly on the = google doc.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Yours,
> >>
> >> Daniel
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> [1]
> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8Du= BwPM2BnBXhoDiptY/edit?usp=3Dsharing
> >> <
> >> https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k= =3D4f3d9c3b-118c475b-4f3ddca0-86e2237f51fb-627e48b069462d70&q=3D1&e= =3D6924b2a6-e7e5-4ec1-a1af-c94637953dc5&u=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.c= om%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1RtxUSvUeBdZWoQkjSj2c3DtR8DuBwPM2BnBXhoDiptY%2Fedit%3Fu= sp%3Dsharing>
> >>
> >>
> >> [2]
> >> https://data= tracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-interim-2017-ace-03-201710191300/
> >>
> >> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.= org/doc/draft-selander-ace-eals/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Daniel Migault
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Ericsson
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Migault
> > Ericsson
> >
>
>
> --
> Daniel Migault
> Ericsson

> _______________________________________________
> Ace mailing list
> Ace@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace

_______________________________________________
Ace mailing list
Ace@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace


--
Daniel Migault
Ericsson
--000000000000efca5a05b45c4801-- From nobody Thu Nov 19 08:03:56 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B9783A00C4; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 08:03:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ri.se Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A9yo_E4KM108; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 08:03:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from EUR03-DB5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr40087.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.4.87]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC6503A0DCC; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 08:03:18 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=jtsLBzpljvC/kwIyhtf/2PD+Arpp60KTo696u8WzmHRaEE7BoM0k5Fb/NKL5GVw0NUZ3Fr1Gf3bpB8d9vE+rXM9gonSxexG78Gj+1RpuHh08PmakiqHktcPLCjy0r1TLVaFjlAzlGkRCdZlO6bjZ9zEJHvSDzVdXEm7GW35oMIfCtz5jlw6uauC07X/u4QLdTmmUZkdNN7AQn+H/xEMx2Q8n7MDKAPo3MYbqot90NDCON4tpLpqOBh3O4N6qkzVR0gUOkGQA4DmuCMKMJRIVKyKwFmk3n6GdywpYa6u61sMF7dd3ye+wjSFgqArw+DyUFsoXqhcd4wUQUJrIVIKhxQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=CCo1w1G3QZoNN3vpI1WL4HHHHyfah+9Q2X7EcBRPD98=; b=WDNxDoEynZfAZgSr8oFSDRv5o+NSr1gdM+ZHULsHB89SBqAyNfKrFsjZ+d8I8wI7cC7mQppEw9teDykg/0u9wYQGfvXyyzEXisa9PogRPrnAowh43iMmbQGuD/R3eVyypZPKbEFs8Vkt1MlbiQWNsQlYbkH/vtplSb5APhc5iGXg0Fxd/cBWhoTSNxF3hwwBqWvC10+UivbORGLjSbCwah2dQxfM26V9760iCYENOGucT2+96c5uHikT8beGutGxT8PfHCKUMpM6Nkl1T+pNNl7PN/95cBWFGGyCF22muFzZMUbz711L3ZKzpmtLVFVtx3HnDxcFfkDpXVbaKbFwFg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ri.se; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ri.se; dkim=pass header.d=ri.se; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ri.se; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=CCo1w1G3QZoNN3vpI1WL4HHHHyfah+9Q2X7EcBRPD98=; b=i91f5jRWcoztCcy3hDDCW6qPzb4sB6L5S+xOxqjtXW3+KdLdH1L8oXtbgiZU/qkfTohfBDklygi7667sEpnzOajb8NED9hbWyS/mW95yzBJ963Mi/SIMRUHRLZ3hRIppRms8zXSO9Z6Zvxlv5N686wwG78EPe/lW8LFxLPZ5Mvs= Authentication-Results: ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ri.se; Received: from DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:10:16e::14) by DB8P189MB0999.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:10:160::20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3589.20; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:03:16 +0000 Received: from DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::c906:d500:5041:56fd]) by DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::c906:d500:5041:56fd%9]) with mapi id 15.20.3589.021; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:03:16 +0000 To: draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile@ietf.org, Ace Wg References: <160381525062.27226.4156909974711721360@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Marco Tiloca Autocrypt: addr=marco.tiloca@ri.se; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQENBFSNeRUBCAC44iazWzj/PE3TiAlBsaWna0JbdIAJFHB8PLrqthI0ZG7GnCLNR8ZhDz6Z aRDPC4FR3UcMhPgZpJIqa6Zi8yWYCqF7A7QhT7E1WdQR1G0+6xUEd0ZD+QBdf29pQadrVZAt 0G4CkUnq5H+Sm05aw2Cpv3JfsATVaemWmujnMTvZ3dFudCGNdsY6kPSVzMRyedX7ArLXyF+0 Kh1T4WUW6NHfEWltnzkcqRhn2NcZtADsxWrMBgZXkLE/dP67SnyFjWYpz7aNpxxA+mb5WBT+ NrSetJlljT0QOXrXMGh98GLfNnLAl6gJryE6MZazN5oxkJgkAep8SevFXzglj7CAsh4PABEB AAG0Nk1hcmNvIFRpbG9jYSAobWFyY28udGlsb2NhQHJpLnNlKSA8bWFyY28udGlsb2NhQHJp LnNlPokBNwQTAQgAIQUCWkAnkAIbAwULCQgHAgYVCAkKCwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAAKCRDuJmS0 DljaQwEvCACJKPJIPGH0oGnLJY4G1I2DgNiyVKt1H4kkc/eT8Bz9OSbAxgZo3Jky382e4Dba ayWrQRFen0aLSFuzbU4BX4O/YRSaIqUO3KwUNO1iTC65OHz0XirGohPUOsc0SEMtpm+4zfYG 7G8p35MK0h9gpwgGMG0j0mZX4RDjuywC88i1VxCwMWGaZRlUrPXkC3nqDDRcPtuEGpncWhAV Qt2ZqeyITv9KCUmDntmXLPe6vEXtOfI9Z3HeqeI8OkGwXpotVobgLa/mVmFj6EALDzj7HC2u tfgxECBJddmcDInrvGgTkZtXEVbyLQuiK20lJmYnmPWN8DXaVVaQ4XP/lXUrzoEzuQENBFSN eRUBCACWmp+k6LkY4/ey7eA7umYVc22iyVqAEXmywDYzEjewYwRcjTrH/Nx1EqwjIDuW+BBE oMLRZOHCgmjo6HRmWIutcYVCt9ieokultkor9BBoQVPiI+Tp51Op02ifkGcrEQNZi7q3fmOt hFZwZ6NJnUbA2bycaKZ8oClvDCQj6AjEydBPnS73UaEoDsqsGVjZwChfOMg5OyFm90QjpIw8 m0uDVcCzKKfxq3T/z7tyRgucIUe84EzBuuJBESEjK/hF0nR2LDh1ShD29FWrFZSNVVCVu1UY ZLAayf8oKKHHpM+whfjEYO4XsDpV4zQ15A+D15HRiHR6Adf4PDtPM1DCwggjABEBAAGJAR8E GAECAAkFAlSNeRUCGwwACgkQ7iZktA5Y2kPGEwf/WNjTy3z74vLmHycVsFXXoQ8W1+858mRy Ad0a8JYzY3xB7CVtqI3Hy894Qcw4H6G799A1OL9B1EeA8Yj3aOz0NbUyf5GW+iotr3h8+KIC OYZ34/BQaOLzdvDNmRoGHn+NeTzhF7eSeiPKi2jex+NVodhjOVGXw8EhYGkeZLvynHEboiLM 4TbyPbVR9HsdVqKGVTDxKSE3namo3kvtY6syRFIiUz5WzJfYAuqbt6m3TxDEb8sA9pzaLuhm fnJRc12H5NVZEZmE/EkJFTlkP4wnZyOSf/r2/Vd0iHauBwv57cpY6HFFMe7rvK4s7ME5zctO Ely5C6NCu1ZaNtdUuqDSPA== Message-ID: <02a1d3ce-071b-e35a-104f-333e54458d4a@ri.se> Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:03:05 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="MhHuhUl8VjV2K6vajIV7eDNoZ1Q3V1G82" X-Originating-IP: [92.34.27.84] X-ClientProxiedBy: MN2PR07CA0016.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:1a0::26) To DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:10:16e::14) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from [192.168.0.68] (92.34.27.84) by MN2PR07CA0016.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:1a0::26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3589.20 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:03:15 +0000 X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 906f45bd-20fa-4703-c61e-08d88ca4a009 X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: DB8P189MB0999: X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:7219; X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1 X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: k3JoGCpQniMydmNlzP0PLJN0LFeM4P4wUAIbPKXfK579jtu8YlxEed6LHxytCxhkEgiVuqEvNHoNlgHzfCdwAuOd7y5YVfk7/s/Y5urtDpvIFIv8Nst7fURUSF8IIlCaxbixkQ4FmxrAK7RmhPBMsppgxbhjDx1MWqIZBedcXPF5a6xELeDoQ+IasWvzOfj5hAuRpylRIByQRCgUiTxtEXYsTdP9hjImX8wzwzwvPTIOYzR1asmMwUZdlRX2rImYeXcEWv6TJyGEVqVO9oCfHaDfOF8MPTtAqU+9iXqA8wqAx7SyvmA40SGAXp1lEZdaymXWcTMO8HHRtnKoKaznQBFnLMl/wl0612LcXsLAISOCxSUdMoDixbzkToCHhdFk5mGV91DIeIpjfZMneg8PIhZyfB4s9m7VUiNi6KvPt6fRXvrxTQX1efTpBuJu5OUnL2NkaCbJImZp7QBEGxHaNQ== X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(136003)(346002)(396003)(39840400004)(376002)(366004)(6486002)(2906002)(966005)(86362001)(4001150100001)(8676002)(31696002)(166002)(83380400001)(21480400003)(66574015)(2616005)(316002)(36756003)(16576012)(26005)(5660300002)(6666004)(53546011)(956004)(186003)(16526019)(52116002)(33964004)(45080400002)(478600001)(6916009)(8936002)(450100002)(235185007)(66556008)(66946007)(44832011)(31686004)(30864003)(66476007)(43740500002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData: 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 X-OriginatorOrg: ri.se X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 906f45bd-20fa-4703-c61e-08d88ca4a009 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DB8P189MB1032.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Nov 2020 16:03:16.4278 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 5a9809cf-0bcb-413a-838a-09ecc40cc9e8 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: JynfuPKWq66XjEcyyYpjkWXfToJvnhB2NM3tHVY9CcJ3yTHN2ekDAj7o72nYtMi/06TNAJCcZpeNjhoRkAsSsw== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB8P189MB0999 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ace] WGLC draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13.txt X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:03:54 -0000 --MhHuhUl8VjV2K6vajIV7eDNoZ1Q3V1G82 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="RuGlrCTzrVxlvgwwGMVruhnlte5o2eKIQ" --RuGlrCTzrVxlvgwwGMVruhnlte5o2eKIQ Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------C7AA28FE11C18E17FA6CAE94" Content-Language: en-US This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------C7AA28FE11C18E17FA6CAE94 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello OSCORE profile authors and ACE, Please, find below some WGLC comments. Hope it helps! Best, /Marco Section 1 * s/is not done by a/is not achieved through a * s/after the first OSCORE exchange/after the first message exchange using OSCORE Section 2 * "This specific identifier, encoded as a byte string, is assigned by the AS to be unique in the sets of its OSCORE Security Contexts ..." =C2=A0=C2=A0 To avoid confusion, it's probably better to say "unique amon= g the issued sets of OSCORE input material", since the AS can have actual OSCORE Security Contexts it uses to communicate with Clients or Resource Servers. * Referring to 'id' as specific identifier, the text says: "and is not used as input material to derive the full OSCORE Security Context." =C2=A0=C2=A0 That's correct, but then the identifier is later included in= Table 1 "OSCORE_Input_Material Parameters" :-) =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 Perhaps it's fine to just revert to OSCORE_Security_Context_= Object, both for the name of Table 1 and in different spots of the text? They would still consider 'id' as OSCORE Input Material Identifier, while aligned with the registry name from Section 9.4. * s/If the request verifies/If the request is successfully verified * s/until token expiration/until token deletion, due to e.g. expiration or revocation * s/the same or different/the same or a different one * Figure 1 can also show the achievement of mutual authentication, following the OSCORE exchange at the end Section 3.1 * s/object. kid field carrying/object, with the kid field carrying Section 3.2 * "... profile negotiation can be omitted" - I think "profile signaling" better reflects what may happen here, see also the beginning of the paragraph. * s/in the the/in the * s/in the 'cnf' parameter of the token/in the 'cnf' claim of the token Section 3.2.1 * In the text entries following Table 1, the CBOR integer labels need to be aligned with the CDDL summary at the end of the section. * s/This parameter identifies the OSCORE_Input_Material/This parameter identifies the OSCORE_Input_Material object * s/the "id" type is byte string/the "id" type is bstr * This version -13 has removed 'clientId' and 'serverId' from Table 1 and thus as code points from the "OSCORE Security Context Parameters" registry. =C2=A0 No strong need to include them back, but even if this profile does= not use them and does not send them on the wire, I think they still belong to the same namespace, since they are descriptive of a security context and are in fact also used as input material to derive it :-) =C2=A0 Section 4 * s/the RS and client authenticates themselves/the RS and client authenticate each other =C2=A0 * s/successfully verified the response from the RS/successfully verified a response from the RS as protected with the established OSCORE context =C2=A0=C2=A0 (similar occurrences are also later in the text) Section 4.1 * In the first paragraph, I suggest to rephrase as "and the posted access token is still retained". =C2=A0 That doesn't require to explicitly mention "valid", since assertin= g especially validity can be non-trivial for the client, e.g. in case of Token revocation. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 (similar occurrences are also later in the text) =C2=A0 * In the second paragraph, I suggest to extend the ending as: =C2=A0 "... makes sure that it does not collide with any of its Recipient= IDs currently used. These include also Recipient IDs used as ID1 value for ongoing executions of this profile." =C2=A0 * s/the client MUST wrap the token and N1 in a CBOR map/the client MUST wrap the token, N1 and ID1 in a CBOR map =C2=A0 * s/using the "access_token" parameter/using the 'access_token' parameter= * In the sixth paragraph, the last sentence says "... as different nonces will be used." Doesn't the client and the RS also negotiate new IDs like they did in the first posting of the same original token? * In the last paragraph: "The client MUST only send the access token in the payload, no nonce or identifier are sent." =C2=A0=C2=A0 Just to be sure, can you expand on this request format? I su= ppose the client still uses Content-Format "application/ace+cbor", just including only the 'access_token' entry in the map. Correct? * In the last paragraph: "... the RS will replace the old token with the new one, maintaining the same Security Context." =C2=A0=C2=A0 This replacement step can be expanded for clarity. A simple = 1-to-1 replacement would overwrite also the stored 'cnf' claim from the original token, among other things. So it should be more about selectively replacing some information originally coming the first token, while keeping some other from it. What to actually replace should include, for instance, information related to access rights (e.g. scope), and to the new token's lifetime (exp, exi). =C2=A0 * While reading this, I was wondering if one could repost the same first token to rekey the OSCORE context. This is mentioned at the end of Section 4.3, but anticipating the possibility here and adding a forward pointer to Section 4.3 would help. Section 4.1.1 and Section 4.1.2 * The first sentence captures the case where the first token is posted or re-posted. It can be rephrased to cover also the posting of a token for updating access rights, where these parameters are not included. Section 4.2 * "any of the mandatory=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 parameters from the AS or the i= dentifier) ..." =C2=A0=C2=A0 It's worth making it explicit that the mentioned identifier = is 'id'. * s/in the 'osc'/in the 'osc' field =C2=A0=C2=A0 * "... the RS must respond" --- Should this not be a MUST ? =C2=A0 * s/is different from the ace_client_recipientid/is different from the value specified in the received 'ace_client_recipientid' parameter * Second paragraph after Figure 11 =C2=A0=C2=A0 - s/MUST discard/MUST ignore =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 - s/the "cnf" parameter of/the 'cnf' claim of =C2=A0=C2=A0 - s/matches the OSCORE Input/matches with the identifier of = the OSCORE Input =C2=A0=C2=A0 - Related to a previous comment about token replacement, som= e information has to be retained from the first token, as not present in the new one. =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 -s/in the "cnf" parameter/in the 'cnf' claim =C2=A0=C2=A0 * It can happen that all is fine for the RS, it installs the OSCORE Security Context, it responds to the client, and the response gets lost. In this case: =C2=A0=C2=A0 - After a timeout expiration, can the client simply repost t= he same token as mentioned at the end of Section 4.3? This can be another reason for reposting the original token, to mention in the sixth paragraph of Section 4.1. =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 - Should the server delete the token and the OSCORE Security= Context, if not receiving an OSCORE protected request from the client before a timeout expires? After all, it's reasonable to assume that a client sends a request right away or not long after the token post is completed. If this is included, it would be one more point in the bullet list for the RS in Section 6. =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 Section 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 * The first sentence captures the case where the first token is posted or re-posted. It can be rephrased to cover also the posting of a token for updating access rights, where these parameters are not included. =C2=A0=C2=A0 Section 4.3 * s/Secret from the parameter, received/Secret from the parameter receive= d * If the client stops the exchange, it should also unlock the ID1 value previously offered. * s/to RS/to the RS * The end of the last paragraph mentions possibly reposting the same first token to rekey the OSCORE context. Consistently with the fourth paragraph of Section 4, I suggest to mention here again that this request is not protected, since not related to updating access rights. Section 5 * s/profile, other/profile, but other Section 6 * s/context expires/context expires or is revoked=C2=A0=C2=A0 (2 instance= s) * In the fourth bullet point, isn't this actually fine if the reposted token is exactly the original first token? In that case, new nonces (and I guess also IDs) are exchanged. * I think there should be one more bullet point in the client list, for when the client receives back ID2 =3D=3D ID1 from the RS, after having reposted the original first access token. (This relates to a previous comment for Section 4.1; I thought a reposting of the first original token involves an exchange of new nonces as well as of new IDs) Section 7 * s/usecase/use case * s/for a client/for a same client=C2=A0=C2=A0 (2 instances) * I think it's better to expand C and Cs to "client" and "clients" On 2020-11-08 23:51, Daniel Migault wrote: > Hi,=C2=A0 > > This email starts a WGLC for the draft draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile > until Monday November 23. We would like to send the document back to > the IESG with sufficient confidence, so please take the time to review > it carefully provide comments and feed backs. > Note that also that the document (13) is being reviewed by the > security directorate. > > Yours,=C2=A0 > Daniel=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile/ > = > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: > > Date: Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 12:14 PM > Subject: [Ace] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13.txt > To: > > Cc: > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Authentication and Authorization for > Constrained Environments WG of the IETF. > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Title=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0: OSCORE Profile of the Authentication and > Authorization for Constrained Environments Framework > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Authors=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0: = Francesca Palombini > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Ludwig Seitz > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 G=C3=B6ran Selander > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Martin Gunnarsson > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Filename=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : draft= -ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13.txt > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Pages=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0: 32 > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Date=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= : 2020-10-27 > > Abstract: > =C2=A0 =C2=A0This memo specifies a profile for the Authentication and > =C2=A0 =C2=A0Authorization for Constrained Environments (ACE) framework= =2E=C2=A0 It > =C2=A0 =C2=A0utilizes Object Security for Constrained RESTful Environme= nts > =C2=A0 =C2=A0(OSCORE) to provide communication security and proof-of-po= ssession > =C2=A0 =C2=A0for a key owned by the client and bound to an OAuth 2.0 ac= cess token. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile/ > = > > There are also htmlized versions available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13 > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13 > > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13 > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org > . > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ace mailing list > Ace@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace > > > > --=20 > Daniel Migault > Ericsson > > _______________________________________________ > Ace mailing list > Ace@ietf.org > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww= =2Eietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Face&data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%= 40ri.se%7C330189d7d82b48dd1e8e08d88438f043%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40c= c9e8%7C0%7C0%7C637404727981024818%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjA= wMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=3DSl= pecuiDXwgoE5ogL8jSqtUO7zVut7dr1q6VXX8y9Z8%3D&reserved=3D0 --=20 Marco Tiloca Ph.D., Senior Researcher RISE Research Institutes of Sweden Division ICT Isafjordsgatan 22 / Kistag=C3=A5ngen 16 SE-164 40 Kista (Sweden) Phone: +46 (0)70 60 46 501 https://www.ri.se --------------C7AA28FE11C18E17FA6CAE94 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello OSCORE profile authors and ACE,

Please, find below some WGLC comments. Hope it helps!

Best,
/Marco



Section 1

* s/is not done by a/is not achieved through a

* s/after the first OSCORE exchange/after the first message exchange using OSCORE


Section 2

* "This specific identifier, encoded as a byte string, is assigned by the AS to be unique in the sets of its OSCORE Security Contexts ..."

=C2=A0=C2=A0 To avoid confusion, it's probably better to say "unique = among the issued sets of OSCORE input material", since the AS can have actual OSCORE Security Contexts it uses to communicate with Clients or Resource Servers.

* Referring to 'id' as specific identifier, the text says: "and is not used as input material to derive the full OSCORE Security Context."

=C2=A0=C2=A0 That's correct, but then the identifier is later include= d in Table 1 "OSCORE_Input_Material Parameters" :-)
=C2=A0=C2=A0
=C2=A0=C2=A0 Perhaps it's fine to just revert to OSCORE_Security_Context_Object, both for the name of Table 1 and in different spots of the text? They would still consider 'id' as OSCORE Input Material Identifier, while aligned with the registry name from Section 9.4.

* s/If the request verifies/If the request is successfully verified
* s/until token expiration/until token deletion, due to e.g. expiration or revocation

* s/the same or different/the same or a different one

* Figure 1 can also show the achievement of mutual authentication, following the OSCORE exchange at the end


Section 3.1

* s/object. kid field carrying/object, with the kid field carrying

Section 3.2

* "... profile negotiation can be omitted" - I think "profile signaling" better reflects what may happen here, see also the beginning of the paragraph.

* s/in the the/in the

* s/in the 'cnf' parameter of the token/in the 'cnf' claim of the token


Section 3.2.1

* In the text entries following Table 1, the CBOR integer labels need to be aligned with the CDDL summary at the end of the section.
* s/This parameter identifies the OSCORE_Input_Material/This parameter identifies the OSCORE_Input_Material object

* s/the "id" type is byte string/the "id" type is bstr

* This version -13 has removed 'clientId' and 'serverId' from Table 1 and thus as code points from the "OSCORE Security Context Parameters" registry.

=C2=A0 No strong need to include them back, but even if this profile = does not use them and does not send them on the wire, I think they still belong to the same namespace, since they are descriptive of a security context and are in fact also used as input material to derive it :-)
=C2=A0

Section 4

* s/the RS and client authenticates themselves/the RS and client authenticate each other
=C2=A0
* s/successfully verified the response from the RS/successfully verified a response from the RS as protected with the established OSCORE context

=C2=A0=C2=A0 (similar occurrences are also later in the text)


Section 4.1

* In the first paragraph, I suggest to rephrase as "and the posted access token is still retained".

=C2=A0 That doesn't require to explicitly mention "valid", since asserting especially validity can be non-trivial for the client, e.g. in case of Token revocation.
=C2=A0
=C2=A0 (similar occurrences are also later in the text)
=C2=A0
* In the second paragraph, I suggest to extend the ending as:

=C2=A0 "... makes sure that it does not collide with any of its Recip= ient IDs currently used. These include also Recipient IDs used as ID1 value for ongoing executions of this profile."
=C2=A0
* s/the client MUST wrap the token and N1 in a CBOR map/the client MUST wrap the token, N1 and ID1 in a CBOR map
=C2=A0
* s/using the "access_token" parameter/using the 'access_token' parameter

* In the sixth paragraph, the last sentence says "... as different nonces will be used." Doesn't the client and the RS also negotiate new IDs like they did in the first posting of the same original token?

* In the last paragraph: "The client MUST only send the access token in the payload, no nonce or identifier are sent."

=C2=A0=C2=A0 Just to be sure, can you expand on this request format? = I suppose the client still uses Content-Format "application/ace+cbor", just including only the 'access_token' entry in the map. Correct?

* In the last paragraph: "... the RS will replace the old token with the new one, maintaining the same Security Context."

=C2=A0=C2=A0 This replacement step can be expanded for clarity. A sim= ple 1-to-1 replacement would overwrite also the stored 'cnf' claim from the original token, among other things. So it should be more about selectively replacing some information originally coming the first token, while keeping some other from it. What to actually replace should include, for instance, information related to access rights (e.g. scope), and to the new token's lifetime (exp, exi).
=C2=A0
* While reading this, I was wondering if one could repost the same first token to rekey the OSCORE context. This is mentioned at the end of Section 4.3, but anticipating the possibility here and adding a forward pointer to Section 4.3 would help.


Section 4.1.1 and Section 4.1.2

* The first sentence captures the case where the first token is posted or re-posted. It can be rephrased to cover also the posting of a token for updating access rights, where these parameters are not included.


Section 4.2

* "any of the mandatory=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 parameters from the AS or t= he identifier) ..."

=C2=A0=C2=A0 It's worth making it explicit that the mentioned identif= ier is 'id'.

* s/in the 'osc'/in the 'osc' field
=C2=A0=C2=A0
* "... the RS must respond" --- Should this not be a MUST ?
=C2=A0
* s/is different from the ace_client_recipientid/is different from the value specified in the received 'ace_client_recipientid' parameter

* Second paragraph after Figure 11

=C2=A0=C2=A0 - s/MUST discard/MUST ignore
=C2=A0=C2=A0
=C2=A0=C2=A0 - s/the "cnf" parameter of/the 'cnf' claim of

=C2=A0=C2=A0 - s/matches the OSCORE Input/matches with the identifier= of the OSCORE Input

=C2=A0=C2=A0 - Related to a previous comment about token replacement,= some information has to be retained from the first token, as not present in the new one.
=C2=A0=C2=A0
=C2=A0=C2=A0 -s/in the "cnf" parameter/in the 'cnf' claim
=C2=A0=C2=A0
* It can happen that all is fine for the RS, it installs the OSCORE Security Context, it responds to the client, and the response gets lost. In this case:

=C2=A0=C2=A0 - After a timeout expiration, can the client simply repo= st the same token as mentioned at the end of Section 4.3? This can be another reason for reposting the original token, to mention in the sixth paragraph of Section 4.1.
=C2=A0=C2=A0
=C2=A0=C2=A0 - Should the server delete the token and the OSCORE Secu= rity Context, if not receiving an OSCORE protected request from the client before a timeout expires? After all, it's reasonable to assume that a client sends a request right away or not long after the token post is completed. If this is included, it would be one more point in the bullet list for the RS in Section 6.
=C2=A0=C2=A0
=C2=A0=C2=A0
Section 4.2.1 and 4.2.2

* The first sentence captures the case where the first token is posted or re-posted. It can be rephrased to cover also the posting of a token for updating access rights, where these parameters are not included.
=C2=A0=C2=A0

Section 4.3

* s/Secret from the parameter, received/Secret from the parameter received

* If the client stops the exchange, it should also unlock the ID1 value previously offered.

* s/to RS/to the RS

* The end of the last paragraph mentions possibly reposting the same first token to rekey the OSCORE context. Consistently with the fourth paragraph of Section 4, I suggest to mention here again that this request is not protected, since not related to updating access rights.


Section 5

* s/profile, other/profile, but other


Section 6

* s/context expires/context expires or is revoked=C2=A0=C2=A0 (2 inst= ances)

* In the fourth bullet point, isn't this actually fine if the reposted token is exactly the original first token? In that case, new nonces (and I guess also IDs) are exchanged.

* I think there should be one more bullet point in the client list, for when the client receives back ID2 =3D=3D ID1 from the RS, after having reposted the original first access token.

(This relates to a previous comment for Section 4.1; I thought a reposting of the first original token involves an exchange of new nonces as well as of new IDs)


Section 7

* s/usecase/use case

* s/for a client/for a same client=C2=A0=C2=A0 (2 instances)

* I think it's better to expand C and Cs to "client" and "clients"

On 2020-11-08 23:51, Daniel Migault wrote:
Hi,=C2=A0

This email starts a WGLC for the draft draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile until Monday November 23. We would like to send the document back to the IESG with sufficient confidence, so please take the time to review it carefully provide comments and feed backs.
Note that also that the document (13) is being reviewed by the security directorate.

Yours,=C2=A0
Daniel=C2=A0 =C2=A0

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/dra= ft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile/

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org&g= t;
Date: Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 12:14 PM
Subject: [Ace] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13.txt
To: <i-d-announce@ietf.org> Cc: <ace@ietf.org>



A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments WG of the IETF.
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Title=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0: OSCORE Profile of the Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments Framework
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Authors=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0: Francesca Palombini
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Ludwig Seitz
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 G=C3=B6ran Selander
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Martin Gunnarsson
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Filename=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= : draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13.txt
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Pages=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0: 32
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Date=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 : 2020-10-27

Abstract:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0This memo specifies a profile for the Authentica= tion and
=C2=A0 =C2=A0Authorization for Constrained Environments (ACE)= framework.=C2=A0 It
=C2=A0 =C2=A0utilizes Object Security for Constrained RESTful= Environments
=C2=A0 =C2=A0(OSCORE) to provide communication security and proof-of-possession
=C2=A0 =C2=A0for a key owned by the client and bound to an OA= uth 2.0 access token.


The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile/
There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13=

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-13


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/


_______________________________________________
Ace mailing list
Ace@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace


--
Daniel Migault
Ericsson

____________________________=
___________________
Ace mailing list
Ace@ie=
tf.org
https://eur02.safelinks.protecti=
on.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fa=
ce&amp;data=3D04%7C01%7Cmarco.tiloca%40ri.se%7C330189d7d82b48dd1e8e08=
d88438f043%7C5a9809cf0bcb413a838a09ecc40cc9e8%7C0%7C0%7C63740472798102481=
8%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1=
haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&amp;sdata=3DSlpecuiDXwgoE5ogL8jSqtUO7zVut7=
dr1q6VXX8y9Z8%3D&amp;reserved=3D0


--=20
Marco Tiloca
Ph.D., Senior Researcher

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden
Division ICT
Isafjordsgatan 22 / Kistag=C3=A5ngen 16
SE-164 40 Kista (Sweden)

Phone: +46 (0)70 60 46 501
https://www=
=2Eri.se
--------------C7AA28FE11C18E17FA6CAE94-- --RuGlrCTzrVxlvgwwGMVruhnlte5o2eKIQ-- --MhHuhUl8VjV2K6vajIV7eDNoZ1Q3V1G82 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEOEo4cV326Z7GypVg7iZktA5Y2kMFAl+2lzkACgkQ7iZktA5Y 2kM9FAf/UAiOZR9zGXYZDbcPRktvEAWpeSd8p0NYY3HbY4f1rauFQb7RuJXWGx7r vNJwYs9pMTC60tfFSnFCNwXFFPCQTLD3XK0Au7uwOXqiECBXpNM9VNqp0RtFsytJ hf5vd6JLpddos6J1wBchvR1d/wEfNrZQRW3vxabC4I+QDvNUOLB3Eiew/yjd9xc9 +2wmRXCfdj88SRQj7QOkQU5iG8EwPm84Obmitp6p3eGziUfg6M36JBt1NNRMRaKJ isWzNN3ZzbMrVOKlzekEGxoyV3O4yghDe4xLKRSynO7qbDH1bGa5JZkK5ivkGUI1 vdyLcx1fiH/CX2iISFGOVr1yVnWiAg== =m9j5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --MhHuhUl8VjV2K6vajIV7eDNoZ1Q3V1G82--