Subject: [core] #314: Explicitly point out that UDP and DTLS don't mix

From: "core issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:04:33 -0000

#314: Explicitly point out that UDP and DTLS don't mix

 Stephen Farrell notes (msg04285f):

 Section 6.2

 (6) 6.2 - "the UDP datagrams MUST...use DTLS" is fine but maybe not
 enough, if the request uses DTLS then presumably so MUST *all* response
 messages, and they MUST use the same DTLS session? Or perhaps one with the
 same authenticated endpoints. Don't you need to say that? If you don't
 then just sending the request via DTLS but getting (some) response
 messages in clear would seem to be allowed.  I think 9.1 might cover all
 the above, but want to just check.

 Carsten says:

 This is implicit in the fact that all exchanges (except for multicast) use
 the same pair of endpoints for both directions, so you simply can't reply
 via NoSec to a DTLS message.  It probably doesn't hurt to make that
 explicit somewhere.

-- 
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:               |      Owner:  [email-masked]
  [email-masked]           |     Status:  new
     Type:  editorial    |  Milestone:  post-IESG-1
 Priority:  minor        |    Version:  coap-15
Component:  coap         |   Keywords:
 Severity:  Submitted    |
  WG Document            |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/core/trac/ticket/314>
core <http://tools.ietf.org/core/>

---

From: "core issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 20:37:45 -0000

Comment (by [email-masked]):

 Fixed in [1354].

 Added the following text to 9.1.1.:

 This means the response to a DTLS secured request MUST always be DTLS
 secured using the same security session and epoch.  A !NoSec response to a
 DTLS request MUST be silently ignored.

-- 
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:               |       Owner:  draft-ietf-core-
  [email-masked]           |  [email-masked]
     Type:  editorial    |      Status:  new
 Priority:  minor        |   Milestone:  post-IESG-1
Component:  coap         |     Version:  coap-15
 Severity:  Submitted    |  Resolution:
  WG Document            |
 Keywords:               |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/core/trac/ticket/314#comment:1>
core <http://tools.ietf.org/core/>

---

From: "core issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 20:38:04 -0000

Changes (by [email-masked]):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed

-- 
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:               |       Owner:  draft-ietf-core-
  [email-masked]           |  [email-masked]
     Type:  editorial    |      Status:  closed
 Priority:  minor        |   Milestone:  post-IESG-1
Component:  coap         |     Version:  coap-15
 Severity:  Submitted    |  Resolution:  fixed
  WG Document            |
 Keywords:               |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/core/trac/ticket/314#comment:2>
core <http://tools.ietf.org/core/>

---

From: "core issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 21:00:44 -0000

Comment (by [email-masked]):

 From [1355]:

 Move over the text re #314 to the request/response layer section
 (9.1.2) and slightly clarify it.

Ticket URL: </ticket/314#comment:3>
core <http://tools.ietf.org/core/>