From nobody Mon Jun 16 07:00:57 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEB751A0034; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:00:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham 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 fAYrIuVJwdur; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:00:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hoemail2.alcatel.com (hoemail2.alcatel.com [192.160.6.149]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 289641A003A; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-239-2-42.lucent.com [135.239.2.42]) by hoemail2.alcatel.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id s5GE0LA6006306 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 16 Jun 2014 09:00:23 -0500 (CDT) Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id s5GE0L1h022215 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 16 Jun 2014 16:00:21 +0200 Received: from FR711WXCHMBA08.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.4.240]) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.111]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 16:00:21 +0200 From: "FOSSATI, Thomas (Thomas)" To: "saag@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-fossati-dtls-over-gsm-sms-00.txt Thread-Index: AQHPiWOM4hux6nsRm0SbWD3JXkPFcA== Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:00:20 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20140616130407.11150.52339.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-ID: <2254E5C2A22F98409DCB62311C88E581@exchange.lucent.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/iFB-Te-h0hT7Kktnbzc6Q01ywF0 Cc: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" , "tls@ietf.org" Subject: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-fossati-dtls-over-gsm-sms-00.txt X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:00:40 -0000 Hi all, I=92ve just uploaded this new I-D about layering DTLS on top of an SMS bear= er. (Its main use-case is in the OMA Lightweight M2M spec.) Any feedback from you sec folks would be very welcome. TLS and DICE mailing lists have been copied in as well as this may (or may = not) be relevant to those working groups, but I=92d rather let SAAG be the = main collector for comments. Thanks very much, Thomas. Begin forwarded message: > From: > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-fossati-dtls-over-gsm-sms-00.= txt > Date: 16 June 2014 14:04:07 BST > To: Thomas Fossati >=20 >=20 > A new version of I-D, draft-fossati-dtls-over-gsm-sms-00.txt > has been successfully submitted by Thomas Fossati and posted to the > IETF repository. >=20 > Name: draft-fossati-dtls-over-gsm-sms > Revision: 00 > Title: Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) over Global System for M= obile Communications (GSM) Short Message Service (SMS) > Document date: 2014-06-16 > Group: Individual Submission > Pages: 8 > URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fossati-dtls-ov= er-gsm-sms-00.txt > Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fossati-dtls-over-= gsm-sms/ > Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fossati-dtls-over-gsm-sm= s-00 >=20 >=20 > Abstract: > This document specifies the use of Datagram Transport Layer Security > (DTLS) over the Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) Short > Message Service (SMS). >=20 >=20 > 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. >=20 > The IETF Secretariat From nobody Fri Jun 20 05:33:05 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1E811B27B2 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 05:33:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.652 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.652 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 NnBjRiY-r-EV for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 05:32:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 535EA1B27B1 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 05:32:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.141] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M0cs6-1WiDlX1Tl0-00ur14 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 14:32:57 +0200 Message-ID: <53A429F4.6070401@gmx.net> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 14:32:52 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5F0tEndUvgeMUsVnS0WBJvaPNbcSKed0t" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:PXKLpM17eOPfgB5AGYX63Araa7X0EEC3ctHcPmf7faNH0w92Iui pQowrvaOCMaCNvjkIHZurX7SG0MKAeQuBRxqWql67bIOABzDZkZXFKPt7lZkiCcngAMhs3a W19l/mCeNom64/e29HNeuzOvtMHV7jyQSmIzFn9th8I19XotVeJqqi8qo1ValrKqaiLt6Bj 8INE6UWIisUnjjJUagfnA== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/Eq8LKi3XwXUPyfg-UecU6Pxl1VA Subject: [Dtls-iot] Progressing the DTLS Profile Document X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 12:33:05 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --5F0tEndUvgeMUsVnS0WBJvaPNbcSKed0t Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, the next IETF meeting is getting closer and I would like to make some progress on the DTLS profile draft. Here is what I am going to do: * I will go through draft -01 and compare it with the issues discussed at the last IETF meeting and on the mailing list. * I will create tickets for the open issues (which will get posted to the DICE mailing list). * You all have a chance to review the open issues, and offer your feedbac= k. Then, before the IETF submission deadline I put the agreed text into the new version of the document. How does that sound? Ciao Hannes --5F0tEndUvgeMUsVnS0WBJvaPNbcSKed0t Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpCn1AAoJEGhJURNOOiAth2cH/1a8PjV05zPdbVfLXZTKpBFV De0odsmTN6E9hvkR/k652JTKTY0qfVURJ/LG873e5DOHRkBso4R92VcgRGzqtHDR arpWSyByXF/l8k6DOatUEaoqdAlBdfg22WlQY1OSdT00I+keAAHU5HOofQcCLIDv k4C3UTM4YyoInaq7jHazO++8ex9l7myZaWxoTx9jbJR9QkfUYFBZiGtWBMTLAgS2 8JyArID7lwjh9mPMsSEu6xklz5y+ICPvGd1fOQIscU/jr9MMJKXl262P00oqb1hH FX0yYNtma7VeSGCYQvHQor97qyplPq7l3HIfR8eJ6LjH0O39VsumkAduvzqIR2k= =Ed1A -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --5F0tEndUvgeMUsVnS0WBJvaPNbcSKed0t-- From nobody Fri Jun 20 08:07:45 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 646B61A0365 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 08:07:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.152 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.152 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 GXkmRkSuc5xG for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 08:07:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from it-ipcorp-02.silverspringnet.com (it-ipcorp-02.silverspringnet.com [74.121.22.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42EC71A036B for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 08:07:37 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvgEAGxNpFMKOQxz/2dsb2JhbABWA4Q5qh8BAQEBAQEGmSoBgR91hAo6NB0BCDZCJQIEARKILgPKfxeFYoZxgV41FxGEMgEDsWCCMA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,514,1400050800"; d="scan'208";a="1402211" Received: from sfo-barrlb-01.silverspringnet.com (HELO mail.silverspringnet.com) ([10.57.12.115]) by it-ipcorp-02.silverspringnet.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 20 Jun 2014 08:07:36 -0700 Received: from SFO-EXMB-03.silverspringnet.com ([fe80::e877:a0b0:2e8d:1b57]) by SFO-EXCA-03.silverspringnet.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0181.006; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 08:07:36 -0700 From: Dorothy Gellert To: Hannes Tschofenig , "dtls-iot@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Dtls-iot] Progressing the DTLS Profile Document Thread-Index: AQHPjIPKyxPv388WP0iyzsBpzx9DrJt6GbIA Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:07:35 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <53A429F4.6070401@gmx.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.57.12.115] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <742769088649D44DB6D545D429EF65FF@silverspringnet.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/8q-t91ukSi6g_n4t21KwsMJJVEk Subject: Re: [Dtls-iot] Progressing the DTLS Profile Document X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:07:43 -0000 Thanks, Hannes. Sounds Good. Dorothy Gellert E dgellert@silverspringnet.com O +1 650 839 4378 C +1 650 556-5994 =20 On 6/20/14, 2:32 PM, "Hannes Tschofenig" wrote: >Hi all, > >the next IETF meeting is getting closer and I would like to make some >progress on the DTLS profile draft. > >Here is what I am going to do: >* I will go through draft -01 and compare it with the issues discussed >at the last IETF meeting and on the mailing list. >* I will create tickets for the open issues (which will get posted to >the DICE mailing list). >* You all have a chance to review the open issues, and offer your >feedback. > >Then, before the IETF submission deadline I put the agreed text into the >new version of the document. > >How does that sound? > >Ciao >Hannes > From nobody Sat Jun 21 11:15:22 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6760C1A03C2 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:15:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 P14tC7N2VddO for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:15:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CBDA1A0397 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:15:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.141] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MfzEP-1XIzVB1a3J-00NTSw for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:15:16 +0200 Message-ID: <53A5CBB5.7040307@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:15:17 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="twwVcoJkHCiotsV3jgvOhcWp10g5M7KEo" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:/9v0E4MulRyIi0q78zMDlZGXK501D6CmmXjb87hzF1RyEGjBpYW J5fF+NUWdKWVY0WFZP2jLdLyX8O7QuHxwkWEHOOA70YZ3N4yXjTJY1q7pZ/kviVZ4gXs3yt PEszSkViw7C2d/Ftxli9VS7Kekd9ebseyLxQamsYIne8wo+sRDNjIPsv6hzsCM9VWgcAWrM JNrIddgqwG9APZq6fiEAg== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/H2tby7F5_44Bs1zR0b71hjp8DeI Subject: [Dtls-iot] Issues not forwarded X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:15:20 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --twwVcoJkHCiotsV3jgvOhcWp10g5M7KEo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, For some reason none of the issues I created seems to have made it to the mailing list (at least that's the impression I get when looking at the Web interface). Hence, I will forward them to the mailing list. Ciao Hannes --twwVcoJkHCiotsV3jgvOhcWp10g5M7KEo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpcu1AAoJEGhJURNOOiAtOqgIAJVTD7BAHuU48wJiph1TAnaB D6ylrZAUZr6QLFGN6uymiJrbsIBApZkcBnR3JTondKYAwUtD3+hzUVKgV4WsLIUX VVYpQkudcVcn+R2HZzyeTW/V6IDwu/s6N1tRhB54oba0j++olQ3bCjb6rhBi0/1J vI0XVzzKPFhARVPT8fCvr9sTxwuwC0VhUYj5M5FDXK+ExgUrpGaGfUHaUn0smx0T JQXMxmXlHD4STJXx2nlhxgJBtShfG+/IIDydixHCj8NA5VYd8wXbsC0QrmoX2Jl2 52Wa6J8KES55UT7LMpXUGtTIqQz7EUWlEfJBZlZlXMPaHqCOdilHZ4C2g0FRB5I= =RyqW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --twwVcoJkHCiotsV3jgvOhcWp10g5M7KEo-- From nobody Sat Jun 21 11:18:55 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F4F71A03B4 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:18:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 Tmj-KAwLyO-U for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 943ED1A03D2 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.141] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LpKY5-1WS7Su3oiz-00f7A7 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:18:50 +0200 Message-ID: <53A5CC8B.8020506@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:18:51 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" References: <064.d8b45c4b32d94e749d1e677a0175fb6d@tools.ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <064.d8b45c4b32d94e749d1e677a0175fb6d@tools.ietf.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <064.d8b45c4b32d94e749d1e677a0175fb6d@tools.ietf.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="B1mUmcHwgffpupRPx6uVpFMMJkuEK1GCA" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:FgVtbatiWbSBYi0AgxmvLMeK/p83C2PGH0g6Fcnv5wWUyc4HdGb qGbkX5xNw1W8DZAD+C6lfdPOVEG5ZIFTmlW0vty4oAjLGf0Rpj/Q3O1Foal9b0nrRj2SbIq JVM9Z8PzoZzYnYhlviHCuto0hw1ctqoNgS57pVOuz97jPqLO0YmSgyIclG3u9ytI3PDhhml VC17zRPvV3vF2SbJD0cqw== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/xFkKzkqVPt0pduoqsnHlgHfM6Jg Subject: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #1 (profile): TLS Compression X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:18:53 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --B1mUmcHwgffpupRPx6uVpFMMJkuEK1GCA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [dice] #1 (profile): TLS Compression Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 12:34:48 -0000 From: dice issue tracker To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net CC: dice@ietf.org #1: TLS Compression Section 10 of draft-ietf-dice-profile-01 recommends that "compression at= the DTLS layer SHOULD NOT be implemented by the DTLS client." I would suggest to avoid RFC 2119 wording. The proposed wording is as follows: "Compression at the DTLS layer is not utilized by DTLS client in the profile described by this document." --=20 ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net | Owner: Hannes Tschofenig Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: Component: profile | Version: Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords: ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Ticket URL: dice --B1mUmcHwgffpupRPx6uVpFMMJkuEK1GCA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpcyLAAoJEGhJURNOOiAtjr8H/jDLHNCGY/vYTzCLZfL2lsFJ oAx/fKJNUY5AlH7DCly/wS5fz3Vbfm3Kj9E3QKL/nHnKdK/HkMsArj3NufHbmL+T 7bF8BPZigPAlZUjKnq9HAQO+iMMCNL5sWu+o+lekHdTklrCnjP+blZ+pWozsPVy2 /WuAMJ2aI5nI/bWxHG0VyD9fQg9vwfLPJXn5VNpL6JuPObw0fTGPjgvazuC4beAT R73qVzubddtWx1O4kIQitI0bBpkKiPFQowoe2B77e7TEiAwZRrk45pSkcbuX4ZnT 96ysysAm82mqjryx0njsanGVDgOZ5YrSj5yHpJvHQU9NAV5qtsjL0Ipc65+NDR0= =hThV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --B1mUmcHwgffpupRPx6uVpFMMJkuEK1GCA-- From nobody Sat Jun 21 11:19:07 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C63DB1A03B4 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 n7JbgVbOkEkf for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1DC01A025D for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.141] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MgHHO-1XJoNG3QjW-00NkDG for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:01 +0200 Message-ID: <53A5CC96.1000007@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:02 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" References: <064.c9b9851f91829225528c4b38397484da@tools.ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <064.c9b9851f91829225528c4b38397484da@tools.ietf.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <064.c9b9851f91829225528c4b38397484da@tools.ietf.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="2t5pQ4lcNstmNf9mj5oSOUeOSS7goWiOc" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:/GEX714t9z9qJiYDpjE6Kuvuz7i/YV0v/c8wmLsdssSo2ZcH1Y7 38zku6+pcHxKqV657vLsKIlnMfq6ryoUE3yeuO4RUkpFSM9LNqqqAIr2Yr/bupyergv7Qax dfJsZamPi+XhJHWhFqKmSpw0a9fLTe0uME7ZYYc9NF8Ilr/Fo3VlZggi7PRKf56UNsgsSYP 3/h5mAZM8MLBPd+EO7SNg== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/F_DTg4tApiC13qSW_t6-113AKoU Subject: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #2 (profile): Keep-Alive Extension X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:19:06 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --2t5pQ4lcNstmNf9mj5oSOUeOSS7goWiOc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [dice] #2 (profile): Keep-Alive Extension Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 12:35:51 -0000 From: dice issue tracker To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net CC: dice@ietf.org #2: Keep-Alive Extension RFC 6520 [RFC6520] defines a heartbeat mechanism to test whether the oth= er peer is still alive. The same mechanism can also be used to perform path= MTU discovery. I believe there are three types of exchanges: 1) Client-initiated, one-shot messages. This is a common case where IoT devices sleep regularly to interact with= some cloud server to upload data on an irregular basis. After the data upload the device goes to sleep. When used with DTLS then one can assume that session resumption is used.= In this case there is no use for a keep-alive extension for this scenari= o. 2) Client-initiated, regular data uploads. This is a variation of case (1) whereby data gets uploaded more regularl= y so that the DTLS context is still setup. If neither NAT bindings nor IP address changes occurred then the DTLS record layer will not notice any changes. For the case where IP and port changes happened it is necessary= to re-create the DTLS record layer using session resumption. Also in this case there is no use for a keep-alive extension for this scenario. 3) Server-initiated messages Unlike in the previous scenarios the server triggers the interaction. Since messages to the client may get blocked by intermediaries, such as NATs and stateful packet filtering firewalls, the initial connection set= up is triggered by the server and then kept alive. State expires fairly quickly at middleboxes and therefore regular heartbeats are necessary. These keep-alive messages may be exchanged at the application layer or within DTLS itself. For this message exchange pattern the use of DTLS heartbeat messages is quite useful. The MTU discovery mechanism, on the other hand, is less likely to be relevant since for many IoT deployments the must constraine= d link is the wireless interface at the IoT device itself rather than somewhere in the network. In more complex network topologies the situati= on might be different. Recommendation: Only for the last category, the heartbeat extension is useful. It might therefore be useful to add the description of these thr= ee categories into the document to provide further background information a= nd to motivate the extension. --=20 ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net | Owner: Hannes Tschofenig Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: profile | Version: Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords: ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Ticket URL: dice --2t5pQ4lcNstmNf9mj5oSOUeOSS7goWiOc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpcyWAAoJEGhJURNOOiAtdIYH/3pAbBe/P2OnnFtbYFpdKG8I oJa9hAxl0lUCkQbjM/x1DwJAv3M89rYhjndIRVVVQtAt+YcboSQU0/0RsnLXsV6A lofnI95EXDNzXTTFhdtbGJ3/qoel6+ddH+8hR0Nb9W/kqMX2abd2tEiMjDQ0kQWX LIbm9YExqLoft4YEkWe7lNarWJqEK1Tss1YGzD9j+NrqyCbaDg3eWMU89ZT+4+qS cp5IzJ7TMK1aB4eTGctqfsN6HAILH3uULNskam/lv03C5g9o2o68uCQLGwQ1dDL1 4OHY8EkSTurX8cX8bkThM2qRdER5FkyAZ8dx3Avr8Ptgc2iLwRwKpmtIrmfEJUE= =Pdnq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --2t5pQ4lcNstmNf9mj5oSOUeOSS7goWiOc-- From nobody Sat Jun 21 11:19:15 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CCD91A046A for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 XMn8uzx0Kg3M for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFC501A025D for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.141] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MKKaI-1WxreF0pc6-001f3b for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:09 +0200 Message-ID: <53A5CC9E.2060104@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:10 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" References: <064.def9c60c08c2f56321c3cf1d9feb041b@tools.ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <064.def9c60c08c2f56321c3cf1d9feb041b@tools.ietf.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <064.def9c60c08c2f56321c3cf1d9feb041b@tools.ietf.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Jari4SFl9h2NjeG7urEimFGWWKfdUg1cH" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:I5A5YpZEDDfRojXyZd1FRNe1icF09chQRESrS2egRUrPwnEdYL7 3Dvm5ChEyrxbngJ1ZlPQesW48/xQraKEbZHXnrSbI/40I2taCT5PsPavWL6RbXDFqvmA//8 /A7eWQzlTlW+DBhoVyetre/wdKvfDROCnVrHAMl+9IYXdOYwGz3jEZEMpgebeSMwK3jFc4R HDzt51olN/Hz7dT2ryhNA== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/RImp0LcB3u9vcNzNcYsd0o7NDHQ Subject: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #3 (profile): Perfect Forward Secrecy X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:19:14 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --Jari4SFl9h2NjeG7urEimFGWWKfdUg1cH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [dice] #3 (profile): Perfect Forward Secrecy Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 12:40:07 -0000 From: dice issue tracker To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net CC: dice@ietf.org #3: Perfect Forward Secrecy The PSK ciphersuite recommended in the CoAP specification [I-D.ietf-core= - coap] does not offer this property. [I-D.sheffer-tls-bcp] on the other hand recommends using ciphersuites offering this security property. What should be said about PFS in this document? Recommendation: Leave the recommendation with the ciphersuite suggested = in the CoAP specification. New ciphersuites might get standardized that off= er PFS support for PSK and the recommendations for CoAP might get updated. --=20 ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net | Owner: Hannes Tschofenig Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: profile | Version: Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords: ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Ticket URL: dice --Jari4SFl9h2NjeG7urEimFGWWKfdUg1cH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpcyeAAoJEGhJURNOOiAtAAEH/3Ok3O8gciC6kUhaD6ecNWXR YAAgf+HgJnda9z8kza4QBo5v6Py+vBMIDGnuoKDqHEZn9Vi1QFWlS0ybqFH8jW6l qwfxpWtr6NOG6MLmMDDWWx3giqPz7An56zdBSXVgsGcpt0seWQUNkNqbgVJ3sx4P pPQjuCLvqTeS8NZLs20X0Ly5AANKpHerlP/gy5uJgys+FVCVwvXwUNvR/n1srSZt VJh/KonSScapc/mxhuawOq6gtx7t8qwg5zlfc5r6vltMc5/MIrH9VHSVe0JIKzzI S3Z+Oku808nc83KWD8/1cQxYIMNcTe+fgMW19iI1VPljjDk7IxVfDCzX2UwazBs= =wev6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Jari4SFl9h2NjeG7urEimFGWWKfdUg1cH-- From nobody Sat Jun 21 11:19:36 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60B951A03B4 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 5M019vrQpIA5 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 181C21A03DC for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.141] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Las1k-1WIVTl4Aq8-00kNKW for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:22 +0200 Message-ID: <53A5CCAB.7030605@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:23 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" References: <064.fb27a07314667ee8f31f693ed382cfdd@tools.ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <064.fb27a07314667ee8f31f693ed382cfdd@tools.ietf.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <064.fb27a07314667ee8f31f693ed382cfdd@tools.ietf.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pkb1Ug1RTCbMJ5T6PiTOgKwNoCDclTVP1" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:CwvzlMmZ5kA22Je0106sT9XtS+MLZ6TKfAUltLxvnF8MyBVr3CD MIn5Cl1YUl6hGDml8JKYFzBZvoyPG3LnUuSNBt4BlyE54CxfTumWoEvfhU3uEFstYOYQgO5 tv2os5NCDy6q6bzyW5DbU2iXL9gdcp/QBvU+qzaAVum4pqCI4JwmYFUGq+XeUe57z8FfRN/ 2CwwGZJ6NNz+PuB6Fsz7w== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/uyUdKF_p90WN9UlsB5AtCyaYDjY Subject: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #4 (profile): Random Number Generation X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:19:30 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --pkb1Ug1RTCbMJ5T6PiTOgKwNoCDclTVP1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [dice] #4 (profile): Random Number Generation Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 14:43:25 -0000 From: dice issue tracker To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net CC: dice@ietf.org #4: Random Number Generation TLS requires random numbers and there have been problems with random number generation on embedded devices [Heninger]. A reference to RFC 408= 6 is already in the draft. Random numbers are required in three places in TLS: * initial random nonces exchanged by the client and the server, * random value encrypted with the server's public key in case of key transport or when certain ciphersuites are used * ephemeral key pairs (e.g., as part of an Diffie-Hellman exchange) Recommendation: IoT devices using TLS must use a hardware-based random number generator since the typical sources contributing to the randomnes= s pool are not available on an embedded device (such as mouse movement, keyboard input, etc.). --=20 ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net | Owner: Hannes Tschofenig Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: profile | Version: Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords: ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Ticket URL: dice --pkb1Ug1RTCbMJ5T6PiTOgKwNoCDclTVP1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpcyrAAoJEGhJURNOOiAt7WkH/3/MAXc48qNltty5Eg5v8A5u JRkBpAUVIsEVSB/XW1D1SbFodC43gGlGnoqVYP0yZ2oX3UVL60F/wZwkmEFsS9cA S8BIwRug6seBn6ytu+QEcQ3bIEtRrtUA54WPqDXEPIf01pN0FnSDdHrhkqPw2f+a u/a0+hvmSihSIJqMeV/TDoOhlMGULrY0lIudd4jB5ZSCJyjH7s/+tfcbZSFPI7l0 uTiMRX6kkavj3wurSCHbTEtrnBA8kfu63zpvzsklbqItOdXkfapQm2+c1XVIwcga Bubl/G5E/nvSh9wltnqX44wJ9WXspcF/yFfkw3dhy0DecOF2iCutMOq4h5WQck4= =DZ9P -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pkb1Ug1RTCbMJ5T6PiTOgKwNoCDclTVP1-- From nobody Sat Jun 21 11:19:49 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0C1C1A040E for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 1LrYbCjTvJlw for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F0C71A040B for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.141] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LhCDT-1WJuG70IUh-00oWUH for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:36 +0200 Message-ID: <53A5CCB9.2020406@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:37 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" References: <064.e8532735517593d9f519860cb9800efd@tools.ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <064.e8532735517593d9f519860cb9800efd@tools.ietf.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <064.e8532735517593d9f519860cb9800efd@tools.ietf.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="uOBBtCDC3e7AcMBC93gS6BaH70vv0bU34" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:dHf8GyxytrPB1Ek9gabeCt/CBr5xYcTttZlc204oziGBFSziQzc G5aUhRQpGFQEljgE1ygywHBjSd49L3UtyK+lA0SIU/+rIkLoyKCoyFkbOSxkVruoBbtpS1y bJmgXzrIkEb97KLF4Dzp10DlhP3M6hEdxIJLIky+SuqkMl5l4HqKhnR8teKhz+pZ+Ag9qeL 0rz0zz4rIA0qbH7OSMyzQ== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/wDIi6mci4-0nmaWLGA0EhOKUtj0 Subject: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #5 (profile): Client Certificate URLs X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:19:41 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --uOBBtCDC3e7AcMBC93gS6BaH70vv0bU34 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [dice] #5 (profile): Client Certificate URLs Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:09:49 -0000 From: dice issue tracker To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net CC: dice@ietf.org #5: Client Certificate URLs This RFC 6066 extension allows avoiding to send client-side certificates= and to send URLs instead, which reduces the over-the-air transmission. This is certainly a useful extension when a certificate-based mode for DTLS is used since the TLS cached info extension does not provide any he= lp with caching information on the server side. Recommendation: Add support for client certificate URLs. --=20 ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net | Owner: Hannes Tschofenig Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: profile | Version: Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords: ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Ticket URL: dice --uOBBtCDC3e7AcMBC93gS6BaH70vv0bU34 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpcy5AAoJEGhJURNOOiAtzo8H/1kJPlCap5UIA8YkwVnipdeK xUN15tQBJHq0WndZNkuTdiVlyBXm7oORYhmgPt5AW8WW1Utx1j6L8A0zdiyyqt3q 5V/3TX62dOA9uG6PQhYiTqBaxoXCaYvYZ5ke3XQ+AG+BKXZ+QeYhoAgkUvy9DNDD LITx/vptJjpSZqG6WOqGyPCSm9+v28Wo3RMw/LXShANxf5PPEt5m84RaXSKSbpDB l2iks7FKsT0fxPq4Up2vmaonxaGLzLPGbIaCSJ6ZrxmITCgrxNY6/oUQr9KSKdSu KyRYZSUq2WhvEEUQDPjjBywe7JaciDdAVEa8Pp8B14newj3ZEThNzu9uj2V6GIQ= =lcgK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --uOBBtCDC3e7AcMBC93gS6BaH70vv0bU34-- From nobody Sat Jun 21 11:19:50 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 334EA1A03B4 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 99o-S8Kup5Ny for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 748F61A025D for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.141] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LeiJ8-1WMN6230Fq-00qR8u for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:40 +0200 Message-ID: <53A5CCBE.4060101@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:42 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" References: <064.910e72df4f0213109533d0be943d9ca1@tools.ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <064.910e72df4f0213109533d0be943d9ca1@tools.ietf.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <064.910e72df4f0213109533d0be943d9ca1@tools.ietf.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="O36aVRiWlJHMfcS4VbiubJiO0H1lNQCjj" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:tF3+33Wl07UEGpuRq/28NS4swVB+Hq92CVQYlnzRoRkffQ4psFV U1h2MeMHZrG3wSZ9HlIj9npPRbxv33Nd5XQjA7VmkEVhpwTQTZTlGHqbNRwh+GnBUUwYPjG RAJVclEJUKnvkAKO2+eWo7p9Oer1RFQEGoLgGF/L9JEGIAcIFMlviuHCtPWqaI0fUJIn2bF irRU20SynZBfwP1l9JFHA== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/YtjZ8dtrEcgkHsG-rWUWli40qFQ Subject: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #6 (profile): Trusted CA Indication X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:19:47 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --O36aVRiWlJHMfcS4VbiubJiO0H1lNQCjj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [dice] #6 (profile): Trusted CA Indication Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:11:36 -0000 From: dice issue tracker To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net CC: dice@ietf.org #6: Trusted CA Indication This RFC 6066 extension allows clients to indicate what trust anchor the= y support. This is useful only when the IoT device has not been pre- provisioned with information about the trust anchors the server-side supports. In most IoT deployments, however, there is a rather fixed relationship between the IoT device (and the software running on them) and the server= - side infrastructure and no such dynamic indication of trust anchors is needed. Recommendation: General recommendation is that this is not useful. Add info in which environment this would add value. --=20 ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net | Owner: Hannes Tschofenig Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: profile | Version: Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords: ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Ticket URL: dice --O36aVRiWlJHMfcS4VbiubJiO0H1lNQCjj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpcy+AAoJEGhJURNOOiAtDZwH/R0wrR4swQDaL82qSLEc6/qm Z37Y0bhGgbhq0iES2BZNQAXZgj9lgluJgMTFqfMqNxGWNLGHen8FH5bbR2Z1YsB3 0wO+CfeAjNpZp/unEF53ouULCAXvip+HgFfjftkTwdiLkhctJrk4kgLCyUyllkz1 nE0eJLVlsqUCxPx1dwfePyULVGnpVIypUHYplLhyuJPm+iYHAABSkNOoyNHFOpg7 bHRru59v0wKw7QL7rlF+dZRr5EqYL76Cq6coP5Mjyd4dmu+RnzCVBkwFAZ1KCEHj d6ezc899ESP6QQTCiXLtITm6aT16pMRyJ4eA926zzzpjSm/Lynho5T6eV1qwa2k= =i76+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --O36aVRiWlJHMfcS4VbiubJiO0H1lNQCjj-- From nobody Sat Jun 21 11:20:01 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 295051A0515 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 zAqyJVZZ8Sju for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 168911A025D for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.141] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MELdk-1WwGB01aB6-00FSGW for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:46 +0200 Message-ID: <53A5CCC3.1010008@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:47 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" References: <064.1b0eba5eac7744401a08e2e121d5540f@tools.ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <064.1b0eba5eac7744401a08e2e121d5540f@tools.ietf.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <064.1b0eba5eac7744401a08e2e121d5540f@tools.ietf.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vo7uTaKscPaQok78spH2BEh8fTwNT1UgB" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:k89jGcVzYEDd76K2UZWpnppupvxvFneGWvFgacMqIWpOPyythgZ a3izpcQFwaGBi3gge2KPVWUacAE0mvbS6cSte8pKTiA0xP4GgyMRvMIM+qqnkOcn2S/om0i 6kUQNWADhOKpE/YC+Gxl2w+L/kzAecpy1ghr2ChcLhUPs6MTLhdMA9Z/3cH6AVgk9DXp+hM h0+vfq8wR3CuudK1WrzXg== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/qsyp4d2gmqyK5sq4delsNnW2oCE Subject: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #7 (profile): Truncated MAC extension X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:19:50 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --vo7uTaKscPaQok78spH2BEh8fTwNT1UgB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [dice] #7 (profile): Truncated MAC extension Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:15:33 -0000 From: dice issue tracker To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net CC: dice@ietf.org #7: Truncated MAC extension This extension reduces the size of the MAC at the Record Layer. This is = a useful extension for those environments where TLS ciphersuites use older= modes of operation. For CoAP, however, the recommended ciphersuites use the AEAD construct, namely the CBC-MAC mode (CCM) with eight-octet authentication tags. Recommendation: This extension does not add any value given the CoAP selected ciphersuites. Recommend against supporting it. --=20 ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net | Owner: Hannes Tschofenig Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: profile | Version: Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords: ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Ticket URL: dice --vo7uTaKscPaQok78spH2BEh8fTwNT1UgB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpczEAAoJEGhJURNOOiAtJZ4IAKd8319bEnvBcNOHV/F728vm vl06NID6zHDsD8vV4B9btXpEemE+zJo3hXd5bN3cCITgNPEYlGO8pSv0vtgTj1kv YtMDkEtXNNj7cHWAUP1tpZ7QEmXVBEndpW/HnM+aVFZ009qKGwzarIFTD2dfAQ+U 3CHXLdeAEjSBjoXhvfg1Z8A7OCkeXQIG1DXTt/Iojwy0LT7ePIep9OIUFivFIB3F +uiyX8xTrvTmMP1OZPpOYXvhkwkiadHItguY4W8j4KEK221N6t+MbgMParcU8GMw 56m7LbcE/2iFRdfCAbRpSSppfxk9asFKF1Sx7pX8UQt6kgIODqN8mNprZky8xx4= =Hivl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vo7uTaKscPaQok78spH2BEh8fTwNT1UgB-- From nobody Sat Jun 21 11:20:03 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2AC71A0549 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 pN9Zs1Z-mgn0 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B32D1A040B for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:19:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.141] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lkjuq-1WNyc03ApQ-00aRft for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:52 +0200 Message-ID: <53A5CCCA.3010502@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:19:54 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" References: <064.9b54adce947a9e55a7ea158642430d42@tools.ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <064.9b54adce947a9e55a7ea158642430d42@tools.ietf.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <064.9b54adce947a9e55a7ea158642430d42@tools.ietf.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ftiewCvM63faoIN1bBo34uU6eW4qF9AIs" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:swCuBeg7c1Qfusm1rC71SjKgJ4eeh0QF9vAIQbwVCqSOzOw2QUr USmBgx0KI9d50KgWHr3hEQUjkq7gCIZUp/Hl4Yh64+gJKkBpN71avFF/eBZPYOW+sCw7pTF HOoYA/0IFIRc7hSOrPL+qSWICjBlChVUNWrERxOVsZAx4ELHjj/gD+cx8a9zEgaDEZZC3Ik HOldjs6U5Ar9Znj1bZ5Pg== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/JkYrp6r-2lBiIEIIP027aYp_ZY8 Subject: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #8 (profile): Server Name Indication X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:19:57 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --ftiewCvM63faoIN1bBo34uU6eW4qF9AIs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [dice] #8 (profile): Server Name Indication Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:16:35 -0000 From: dice issue tracker To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net CC: dice@ietf.org #8: Server Name Indication This extension defines a mechanism for a client to tell a TLS server the= name of the server it wants to contact. This is a useful extension for many hosting environments where multiple virtual servers are run on sing= le IP address. Recommendation: Offer support for this extension in the profile. --=20 ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net | Owner: Hannes Tschofenig Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: profile | Version: Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords: ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Ticket URL: dice --ftiewCvM63faoIN1bBo34uU6eW4qF9AIs Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpczKAAoJEGhJURNOOiAtKs0H/0hICjLKlgNr3etatX5GY8fh tqhEi2aMWlLNjECs7klQxuVCGC5kye+TQlMfuQ7TOHfU8VpwPsP3fba99EVhoLmr aLsBkXOfSFrQLkJwaajiL8jvRQsfF4ZVnO+4ca1FrnLpMfv9DRkMhg1Lz+sbMxlO NKXjXeFRqe7k9XhY6Pb6lKjJQsl3vUd4x83ErpnHGl7SCulAiPQ20mZ099rzCUN6 7dg+67O2KMQVrVz6FzHYXf2OBflafk28Ckx8lGa0krqBh2L8wYcxibnzx1V5GFjO DOJ6X/6urv1wkfQczuwgz6y1VjEKNcJvkGocm+2R5OaQ34CZ+3m2VY/Z3py5930= =0l2B -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ftiewCvM63faoIN1bBo34uU6eW4qF9AIs-- From nobody Sat Jun 21 11:20:23 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D39E1A03D2 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:20:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 AOODWOfQiDso for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:20:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C8F11A063A for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.141] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M5IdH-1WmOQ13TEV-00zXnQ for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:20:03 +0200 Message-ID: <53A5CCD4.9040908@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:20:04 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" References: <064.3e9c98a1244c779aef94a45211801a60@tools.ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <064.3e9c98a1244c779aef94a45211801a60@tools.ietf.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <064.3e9c98a1244c779aef94a45211801a60@tools.ietf.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vhNjwMgeCIeqGniNlpGsI9SmW1KP7Uc6W" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:cJamUKY4NahpJPgo436EE+z3aoF0tQD+BUpwsbPPneRXWV3Q5Lq 7tpXruShV4YHVwkHEBlzt8evpz61sAbFbGTn0emmrmWYuYU/t+jRXJS29jDZiTIQ3hQdNw0 YbyilD1p7GtY9dwvl8Nh8MmcxJPF//fxBWTy/t8jcOdc7kBPey08XeMeSKNLMwdTUvSa3WD 6ViXAGDpb63c11lbSyRFg== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/okS_T64yWl-8o9Q_N-nk66EDdUk Subject: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #9 (profile): Maximum Fragment Length Negotiation X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:20:14 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --vhNjwMgeCIeqGniNlpGsI9SmW1KP7Uc6W Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [dice] #9 (profile): Maximum Fragment Length Negotiation Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:22:06 -0000 From: dice issue tracker To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net CC: dice@ietf.org #9: Maximum Fragment Length Negotiation This extension lowers the maximum fragment length support needed for the= Record Layer from 2^14 bytes to 2^9 bytes. This is a very useful extension that allows the client to indicate to th= e server how much buffers it has. The goal is to allows client implementations to make use of much lower RAM since the client does not need to accept packets of extremely large size (such as 16k bytes as required by plain TLS/DTLS). Recommendation: Client implementations must support this extension. --=20 ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net | Owner: Hannes Tschofenig Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: profile | Version: Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords: ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Ticket URL: dice --vhNjwMgeCIeqGniNlpGsI9SmW1KP7Uc6W Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpczUAAoJEGhJURNOOiAtpS8IAJcfV0DON0IMSdlMbNJ8nwp3 WHHIX4KK1H08w5w3XRNUirZ2CK2eVp4J5uDiygxHcWcYxyjjpqPs4laFXnqX/sWN DTVqnu6aMAny0RxLu49fuNogn33PJlbN22mcTaz9JeOFXRpoxJRa5nnvLC0Trdql 5vvtulImJrXLTYOrqv7nttwcFVdVzJXwM4cain1eRmDnbWQW/40sgptwJo4FkyhU 5Q/rR7oto1GZePdOE/dGhHmL7FacWUh4Sjj821ApNEsetEu0jWb+lKnXmxHPENDa yp1RPaUw4La4mFGX9hHqX3teL4DNDdGxg8mqNYHuPMXBO4Xhri5jflW0ihUR+RE= =K+Jh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vhNjwMgeCIeqGniNlpGsI9SmW1KP7Uc6W-- From nobody Sat Jun 21 11:23:23 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 142BD1A03B4 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:23:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 hLLkszL3pDDX for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:23:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44EBD1A0350 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:23:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.141] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LguAU-1WKBJQ3AJC-00oFVu for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:23:18 +0200 Message-ID: <53A5CD98.6060006@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 20:23:20 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" References: <53A5CBB5.7040307@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <53A5CBB5.7040307@gmx.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Bf9CHFJBA5sTxmNWdl7psSftMde7nRELl" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:cjhMJLDdVJg4064R49nzJNs30Ue5dt9ehZluJPS80vFrF0OLe6h glrfBllCo9rM/1W4Oa8czDZSFxqbifxWRkiLMohz814WEm3andtSR+nueEn6xxaSOPCaPco 91+pRxkdzjBp6MCOyZIqOPIZrMFaSqyNUr/NvqB8o2gBPaamIoBdB4DLv3jAgGpTpGm0kWW 8lnouIJzxkRYfvhZzVGow== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/qkFs3Wqo51H8yHCEt97cxqXT5xQ Subject: Re: [Dtls-iot] Issues not forwarded X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:23:22 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --Bf9CHFJBA5sTxmNWdl7psSftMde7nRELl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I also figured out what the reason for the problem is: the issue tracker is not configured correctly and sends mails to the wrong address (namely dice@ietf.org instead of dtls-iot@ietf.org). I reported the issue and guess it will be fixed some time soon. Ciao Hannes On 06/21/2014 08:15 PM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote: > Hi all, >=20 > For some reason none of the issues I created seems to have made it to > the mailing list (at least that's the impression I get when looking at > the Web interface). >=20 > Hence, I will forward them to the mailing list. >=20 > Ciao > Hannes >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > dtls-iot mailing list > dtls-iot@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtls-iot >=20 --Bf9CHFJBA5sTxmNWdl7psSftMde7nRELl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpc2YAAoJEGhJURNOOiAt5Q4H/1fg7ylEkQaqs+ZTWynwwosB NRBe+S7y7sjCwza4Hci57tNN9e+DzBHrO/H4jLObvD5e2QgDvhYSGoVlCqEewyeN bVUOLzUB8inbQq79AwOPdmIe237OIXM38uafb6Tu7XC9YpnNU8iTSin/g02criks /+dWkJ0vxCSC/UvQ6RIM2Gq6kFUzEge76v1/TtdQCtUON9lxKP+hzbOCpboAepWz KlurpWD/k1ZcyCNZJBBE00dYtFYgflq2V4Atcgpat6DHheEgbhpMqI/l0QHm3rX/ scWCmhpMKhj4aj3lh8aU9WLPD3agfRHJU2lkznBjg2BQoL+4BlBaUV94TmJL5wQ= =aFOB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Bf9CHFJBA5sTxmNWdl7psSftMde7nRELl-- From nobody Sat Jun 21 12:24:45 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F6201A03BC for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 12:24:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 DkBlA6-VFpLu for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 12:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from odin.smetech.net (mail.smetech.net [209.135.209.4]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1DCD1A03A3 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 12:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [209.135.209.5]) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4F4AF2C0DC; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:24:29 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net Received: from odin.smetech.net ([209.135.209.4]) by localhost (ronin.smeinc.net [209.135.209.5]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cUfzfvepbV01; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:24:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.2.100] (pool-96-255-144-77.washdc.fios.verizon.net [96.255.144.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74A6DF2C0DB; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:24:08 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Russ Housley In-Reply-To: <53A5CC8B.8020506@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:23:56 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <63655684-0E9D-4B13-818E-DC3DD96CA13D@vigilsec.com> References: <064.d8b45c4b32d94e749d1e677a0175fb6d@tools.ietf.org> <53A5CC8B.8020506@gmx.net> To: Hannes Tschofenig X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 1.4.1 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/TMnkf10kX7sqwxCjbFOdIRSMA1M Cc: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #1 (profile): TLS Compression X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 19:24:42 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > Subject: [dice] #1 (profile): TLS Compression > Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 12:34:48 -0000 > From: dice issue tracker > To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net > CC: dice@ietf.org >=20 > #1: TLS Compression >=20 > Section 10 of draft-ietf-dice-profile-01 recommends that "compression = at > the DTLS layer SHOULD NOT be implemented by the DTLS client." >=20 > I would suggest to avoid RFC 2119 wording. >=20 > The proposed wording is as follows: >=20 > "Compression at the DTLS layer is not utilized by DTLS client in the > profile described by this document." A more straightforward wording would be: "This DTLS client profile does not include DTLS layer compression." Russ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iEYEARECAAYFAlOl28wACgkQiuTu0PWcEcsxFgCfQLPNCjD6fCqDJBvsn/rDSlUa UlMAn2Rg35XkeUg/vvU3q/RrJC/0yLYC =3DBBEA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From nobody Sat Jun 21 12:32:55 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A485A1A0294 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 12:32:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 UP29LZfrweMX for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 12:32:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from odin.smetech.net (mail.smetech.net [209.135.209.4]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42C0B1A04FA for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 12:32:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [209.135.209.5]) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64AECF2C0DC; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:32:36 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net Received: from odin.smetech.net ([209.135.209.4]) by localhost (ronin.smeinc.net [209.135.209.5]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o6EACz1-WJ7n; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:32:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.2.100] (pool-96-255-144-77.washdc.fios.verizon.net [96.255.144.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 798FDF2C0DB; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:32:13 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Russ Housley In-Reply-To: <53A5CCAB.7030605@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:32:01 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <05BF7E45-33AF-48F2-A18B-FA23FCBE5A42@vigilsec.com> References: <064.fb27a07314667ee8f31f693ed382cfdd@tools.ietf.org> <53A5CCAB.7030605@gmx.net> To: Hannes Tschofenig X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/2TXcL3M8kwHe37LPketTzYpz46A Cc: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #4 (profile): Random Number Generation X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 19:32:53 -0000 I like hardware devices for random numbers, but we do not really care = what implementation approach is used as long as the result is quality = random numbers. I'd prefer to state the requirement and not the = mechanism. There is an opportunity in the security considerations to = warn implementers that mouse movement, keyboard input, and so on are not = available as entropy in most embedded devices. So, then need to seek = other sources for entropy. Russ > Subject: [dice] #4 (profile): Random Number Generation > Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 14:43:25 -0000 > From: dice issue tracker > To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net > CC: dice@ietf.org >=20 > #4: Random Number Generation >=20 > TLS requires random numbers and there have been problems with random > number generation on embedded devices [Heninger]. A reference to RFC = 4086 > is already in the draft. >=20 > Random numbers are required in three places in TLS: >=20 > * initial random nonces exchanged by the client and the server, > * random value encrypted with the server's public key in case of key > transport or when certain ciphersuites are used > * ephemeral key pairs (e.g., as part of an Diffie-Hellman exchange) >=20 > Recommendation: IoT devices using TLS must use a hardware-based random > number generator since the typical sources contributing to the = randomness > pool are not available on an embedded device (such as mouse movement, > keyboard input, etc.). From nobody Sat Jun 21 12:37:31 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 966381A04FA for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 12:37:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 f2-WI9ldXaJH for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 12:37:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from odin.smetech.net (mail.smetech.net [209.135.209.4]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A0131A04B9 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 12:37:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [209.135.209.5]) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88C3EF2C0DC; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:37:18 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net Received: from odin.smetech.net ([209.135.209.4]) by localhost (ronin.smeinc.net [209.135.209.5]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y1oGUsp+HR7x; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:36:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.2.100] (pool-96-255-144-77.washdc.fios.verizon.net [96.255.144.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 735FEF2C0DB; Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:36:57 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Russ Housley In-Reply-To: <53A5CCC3.1010008@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:36:45 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <064.1b0eba5eac7744401a08e2e121d5540f@tools.ietf.org> <53A5CCC3.1010008@gmx.net> To: Hannes Tschofenig X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/naKpidFzLDkuMCuMnFHADof3ZF4 Cc: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #7 (profile): Truncated MAC extension X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 19:37:29 -0000 I agree with this recommendation if and only if the profile clearly = states that it only supports AEAD ciphersuites. Russ > Subject: [dice] #7 (profile): Truncated MAC extension > Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:15:33 -0000 > From: dice issue tracker > To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net > CC: dice@ietf.org >=20 > #7: Truncated MAC extension >=20 > This extension reduces the size of the MAC at the Record Layer. This = is a > useful extension for those environments where TLS ciphersuites use = older > modes of operation. >=20 > For CoAP, however, the recommended ciphersuites use the AEAD = construct, > namely the CBC-MAC mode (CCM) with eight-octet authentication tags. >=20 > Recommendation: This extension does not add any value given the CoAP > selected ciphersuites. Recommend against supporting it. From nobody Sun Jun 22 00:32:53 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAFE91B28A2 for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:32:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 nCLWQMyDcv-0 for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:32:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB1AD1B28A1 for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:32:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.142] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MP0LT-1X1eWO38Cd-006Lt5; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 09:32:07 +0200 Message-ID: <53A6867B.2090807@gmx.net> Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 09:32:11 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: housley@vigilsec.com References: <064.d8b45c4b32d94e749d1e677a0175fb6d@tools.ietf.org> <53A5CC8B.8020506@gmx.net> <63655684-0E9D-4B13-818E-DC3DD96CA13D@vigilsec.com> In-Reply-To: <63655684-0E9D-4B13-818E-DC3DD96CA13D@vigilsec.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IQW3rNAitI8w1tfl60LUc4OSoDdOl8Gfr" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:64ewqUb/Q4lxQ96iPSa2yFfxnq8CxYWgWmaWvDsgUKmNhzPrIx6 bZN5e84W4f+pBEAIIwxYyeOJg+nbyN/c60okhCuzZmObHWPeG00FyChL360nbmBy7a9QYxp dluI03rvy2RoDiByDnmWdkq6Fclj0OVoeRRbOZTM0X/BI+csaSf3WO1RWdKjwTkuPFcYJ4A fZsePhd1Z4+/3Klgdl5Ww== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/lSDXYW8XpstGhBIJaICOhr4WRnc Cc: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #1 (profile): TLS Compression X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 07:32:35 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --IQW3rNAitI8w1tfl60LUc4OSoDdOl8Gfr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Perfect for me. On 06/21/2014 09:23 PM, Russ Housley wrote: > A more straightforward wording would be: > "This DTLS client profile does not include DTLS layer compression." --IQW3rNAitI8w1tfl60LUc4OSoDdOl8Gfr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpoZ7AAoJEGhJURNOOiAtG+cH/2UG00pO0eWYnaSmT4PhnDUG YCTs1rjuPHddIFseHF5KRV8GGwwaZh1+AULyZhXG3gQpq14oAIDPn62rzXGCULFX CYf5f0cmguPHirS8qBkSgoWZkzP5At1R/JaOjQnPsziwUoXejvq8m3Ey6sn6581W c5+wF0x1xj/gALSnIT1+EdAhRa/Dd5hWiyQGWoeLmNnqMj6LQEzY+GjR/gTKPwdh o8JMBd3hJ4ifG4MI1iIC2+OKj05BUZhT+ItJB9KNWJ5UB+u10rPrUz+kH1qFyMJS HT1GYYf6HI/DegHaewgwWhSx6hLPuAj02YDULL0WvHKhlvdHsZu8qyRdgxB42xs= =4PVA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IQW3rNAitI8w1tfl60LUc4OSoDdOl8Gfr-- From nobody Sun Jun 22 00:33:49 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D6D71B28A0 for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:33:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 qmVpMQAWobL9 for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:33:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 438EC1B2895 for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:33:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.142] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LnDof-1WV4sd1lev-00hKM2; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 09:33:02 +0200 Message-ID: <53A686AF.2020106@gmx.net> Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 09:33:03 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: housley@vigilsec.com References: <064.1b0eba5eac7744401a08e2e121d5540f@tools.ietf.org> <53A5CCC3.1010008@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="72u4nkXiKFIxstfc5jtIPAxFVtX54gDul" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:aGxxqOtec4QzLeTzYR1Y6x6dCBlf9/OgkOtITmBYVcL7KE/CaeC OqeG0T1JEkst1UDqR50TAfQAbQvxm6j2YjnI4jt0zM7cIR7l6AkoaFw9WGEu3G6CcFX2FAV 2zzcFF+QLnu5zVkaiDSb134yhdpUfOobiSLWN1FxG6KKwANPUXvytzAvTs8BAiopmVNt6cD 6EXvTkPHGZYg+5ZNTrltQ== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/km6YXvmC7vrfyV7r8XMN-DJpelo Cc: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #7 (profile): Truncated MAC extension X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 07:33:46 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --72u4nkXiKFIxstfc5jtIPAxFVtX54gDul Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Russ, This additional qualification makes sense to me. I also don't think we are too restrictive with the focus on AEAD ciphersuites for the use cases we are talking about. Ciao Hannes On 06/21/2014 09:36 PM, Russ Housley wrote: > I agree with this recommendation if and only if the profile clearly sta= tes that it only supports AEAD ciphersuites. >=20 > Russ >=20 >=20 >> Subject: [dice] #7 (profile): Truncated MAC extension >> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:15:33 -0000 >> From: dice issue tracker >> To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net >> CC: dice@ietf.org >> >> #7: Truncated MAC extension >> >> This extension reduces the size of the MAC at the Record Layer. This i= s a >> useful extension for those environments where TLS ciphersuites use old= er >> modes of operation. >> >> For CoAP, however, the recommended ciphersuites use the AEAD construct= , >> namely the CBC-MAC mode (CCM) with eight-octet authentication tags. >> >> Recommendation: This extension does not add any value given the CoAP >> selected ciphersuites. Recommend against supporting it. >=20 --72u4nkXiKFIxstfc5jtIPAxFVtX54gDul Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpoavAAoJEGhJURNOOiAtMJAH/25QnAytn/8ySYpugJ7HKhuY /PbKDyk7Gutik4TtdAOGxiL2wWKj6k8shMmcYQhk+eVf9kv59wbwGBwE8l15U4pU gyU/95uEoaAK3gRRvXKwGMY8MW7TOOEjLpgO3YKQSd6WAoPn1qIlq0fp7mK8uqWj yPVlvPsvmry+SyxKiRcCsWwube0oTebeu/6Rk8q0jiGvFs3m2zJehAATRyTvxtud lbSUQfuLGVKbiYWTOpVdvp0fBVOfLtc9gi5rUr348dHQCpKP+nwClSRDwL3Y+Mii cseiONnw+NUqDNdNdxdnJy2ddO1HlcGSSwpd0CpH5crdn03HjN2MCnM2E5jmWGg= =Jove -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --72u4nkXiKFIxstfc5jtIPAxFVtX54gDul-- From nobody Sun Jun 22 00:41:55 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 468D21B28B7 for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:41:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 Q0wvx_HMLUlK for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:40:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 928B91B28AD for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 00:40:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.142] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LuP19-1WWooA2Ndf-011mgr; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 09:39:21 +0200 Message-ID: <53A6882D.7080204@gmx.net> Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 09:39:25 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Russ Housley References: <064.fb27a07314667ee8f31f693ed382cfdd@tools.ietf.org> <53A5CCAB.7030605@gmx.net> <05BF7E45-33AF-48F2-A18B-FA23FCBE5A42@vigilsec.com> In-Reply-To: <05BF7E45-33AF-48F2-A18B-FA23FCBE5A42@vigilsec.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="JO9HlhqNeSaRv5UjCTKmeVG62fFLdegn1" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:WRC56byrKCWhBqUWN+pEIoxbGag4TmGFBEPWpUQd/Z4REFxVoM/ 2LyK7g8bUGZI0scz6ZwfRnUPLNT/S6Qo3TvRfGKjef1xCA8C6VqjPrLKH/4Lk9F5qCAoHqJ QxVhx+Gn5TG/J/Txqr+1A+/s5ZP87v7XrjltTKnXoscNHtqImzdJuxCwAwSkmxdOkUVrs91 z4RTEAOx+q870wnn7mTnA== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/wLkmh69X67mCWuTBmrJeM2acOvM Cc: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #4 (profile): Random Number Generation X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 07:41:29 -0000 X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 07:41:29 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --JO9HlhqNeSaRv5UjCTKmeVG62fFLdegn1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Russ, you are right that the actual implementation details do not matter. Will make it more generic and add a discussion about the problems embedded systems are facing. Some of it is already in the document via the reference to [Heninger]. I think it is very important to the reader to convey the message regarding random number generation since I see cases where Internet protocols are ported to embedded platforms but little thought it spent on the circumstance that the previously available sources of randomness suddenly don't exist anymore. I was also wondering about the reaction from the group since there are participants who have been involved in the design of some of those IoT systems and I am curious about their approach for solving this issue. Another one, which I haven't added to the issue tracker yet, is the use of a clock. Not even the Raspberry Pi has a real-time clock... Ciao Hannes [Heninger] Heninger, N., Durumeric, Z., Wustrow, E., and A. Halderman, "Mining Your Ps and Qs: Detection of Widespread Weak Keys in Network Devices", 21st USENIX Security Symposium, https://www.usenix.org/conference/ usenixsecurity12/technical-sessions/presentation/heninger, 2012. On 06/21/2014 09:32 PM, Russ Housley wrote: > I like hardware devices for random numbers, but we do not really care > what implementation approach is used as long as the result is quality > random numbers. I'd prefer to state the requirement and not the > mechanism. There is an opportunity in the security considerations to > warn implementers that mouse movement, keyboard input, and so on are > not available as entropy in most embedded devices. So, then need to > seek other sources for entropy. >=20 > Russ >=20 >=20 >> Subject: [dice] #4 (profile): Random Number Generation Date: Fri, >> 20 Jun 2014 14:43:25 -0000 From: dice issue tracker >> To: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net CC: >> dice@ietf.org >>=20 >> #4: Random Number Generation >>=20 >> TLS requires random numbers and there have been problems with >> random number generation on embedded devices [Heninger]. A >> reference to RFC 4086 is already in the draft. >>=20 >> Random numbers are required in three places in TLS: >>=20 >> * initial random nonces exchanged by the client and the server, * >> random value encrypted with the server's public key in case of key=20 >> transport or when certain ciphersuites are used * ephemeral key >> pairs (e.g., as part of an Diffie-Hellman exchange) >>=20 >> Recommendation: IoT devices using TLS must use a hardware-based >> random number generator since the typical sources contributing to >> the randomness pool are not available on an embedded device (such >> as mouse movement, keyboard input, etc.). >=20 > _______________________________________________ dtls-iot mailing > list dtls-iot@ietf.org=20 > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtls-iot >=20 --JO9HlhqNeSaRv5UjCTKmeVG62fFLdegn1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTpoguAAoJEGhJURNOOiAtA5cIAIY5zjSyi0KbbIp+TRTNfFaU GnQE6B0x8wXuCk7TxOHvVFX5pNByBazqgMlD+5HfHl/c0LT7utguP6NkIwdiG9tz HC/RzHCyB8lTnO5dyuAVur8VMoF7oOMkjLWqCSGMyTj82/RP6KpwfWAiEsSjLjLc 5FiTWm1HyZ/cge4nGsQYgskd9aDaq78YXvAvx7jKalykso3jquhGfm9kfoJ+d54n O55TS8iy1tpCJcVSr6DLEKRhILk5rlJaQiro/xjuF9Im9e3kCte2YuyywX1I4e0G G38tRiLNrfEURnGQmINRSmfSzYMshRFp+TmMv4ZFwVYy6Inz4BEFduSCqtA6fdw= =kcnT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --JO9HlhqNeSaRv5UjCTKmeVG62fFLdegn1-- From nobody Sun Jun 22 08:44:06 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5683B1B279D for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 08:44:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.475 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.475 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, T_TVD_MIME_NO_HEADERS=0.01] autolearn=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 jeoileQOhhVm for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 08:44:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (gateway.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca [209.87.252.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAA5C1A0396 for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 08:43:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D1B22003A; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 11:48:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 2E82A63B0E; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 11:43:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB06263B0A; Sun, 22 Jun 2014 11:43:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Richardson To: Hannes Tschofenig In-Reply-To: <53A5CC96.1000007@gmx.net> References: <064.c9b9851f91829225528c4b38397484da@tools.ietf.org> <53A5CC96.1000007@gmx.net> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.2; nmh 1.3-dev; GNU Emacs 23.4.1 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 Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/JXZ3kskfWAXssyC-bVt2tfkXEss Cc: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #2 (profile): Keep-Alive Extension X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:44:01 -0000 --=-=-= Hannes Tschofenig wrote: > 1) Client-initiated, one-shot messages. > This is a common case where IoT devices sleep regularly to interact with > some cloud server to upload data on an irregular basis. After the data > upload the device goes to sleep. > When used with DTLS then one can assume that session resumption is used. Perhaps rather than assume, one could say that, "since the upload is on an irregular and unpredicable basis and due to renumbering and NAT, may originate from unpredictable origins, only a new session, or a resumed can be used" > 2) Client-initiated, regular data uploads. > This is a variation of case (1) whereby data gets uploaded more regularly > so that the DTLS context is still setup. If neither NAT bindings nor IP > address changes occurred then the DTLS record layer will not notice any > changes. (and, this is clearly a place where IPv6 has a definite win) > 3) Server-initiated messages > Unlike in the previous scenarios the server triggers the interaction. > Since messages to the client may get blocked by intermediaries, such as > NATs and stateful packet filtering firewalls, the initial connection setup > is triggered by the server and then kept alive. State expires fairly > quickly at middleboxes and therefore regular heartbeats are necessary. > These keep-alive messages may be exchanged at the application layer or > within DTLS itself. > For this message exchange pattern the use of DTLS heartbeat messages is > quite useful. The MTU discovery mechanism, on the other hand, is less > likely to be relevant since for many IoT deployments the must constrained > link is the wireless interface at the IoT device itself rather than > somewhere in the network. In more complex network topologies the situation > might be different. > Recommendation: Only for the last category, the heartbeat extension is > useful. It might therefore be useful to add the description of these three > categories into the document to provide further background information and > to motivate the extension. I agree. -- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQEVAwUBU6b5tYCLcPvd0N1lAQIEHgf/UOx1SaB+H9tgJcVytTnOdcL4kEygrk3l tO0jyL919lcqjScnFD3Ueq40VOec0n5Ln8UJKzneNknP1yE7Vbue5MqkJfNr9lD6 q+AJCGqqUlwlUwughmDDBTQW527bGxgseASgl2Ym3R5L9iZihz85LpXUKqAVng0x LyUX94bf6hGQesWiTX+UdWqRxqBBuPNkofLKhrLCUfMv2wRdb/EflLzDg2koGrwQ un10smLKxekcCO94rboW/oVbToQLhf3Qjkl6oLPL+ImYJzygGErlG9PkN5/n5Ysv 7+fo4QEo4ZOOBJbl8/PmOHYL0LyiypfCfQXDMcUsAVkiAlVftZFsGA== =Osg8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From nobody Mon Jun 23 13:06:12 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C12001B2C4B; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 13:06:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 tdq1svAAAL54; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 13:06:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 8C6881B2C33; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 13:06:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.224.120]) by informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s5NK5u5m007257; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:05:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.217.145] (p54891060.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.137.16.96]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 60EAA159B; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:05:55 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:05:54 +0200 X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 425246754.149578-3944e772140e9cab6d30a3eada28576f Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <63722FD9-BA11-48E6-951A-7A3823F5EFD5@tzi.org> References: To: dtls-iot@ietf.org, core , ace@ietf.org, "6lo@ietf.org WG" <6lo@ietf.org>, lwip@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.2) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/Qg8eqGYhg1EgHG-glLQSH0eAbcw Subject: [Dtls-iot] Constrained Node/Network Cluster @ IETF90, early draft version X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 20:06:05 -0000 A first draft version of the IETF90 agenda is out. ** THIS IS GOING TO CHANGE ** for conflict resolution, so please don't make travel arrangements based on it. Here is my usual eclectic condensed agenda built from that. =20 The Constrained Node/Network group meetings are nicely spread out over = the week. All times are EDT (UTC-0400) (use = https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/agenda-utc and press the button to = get your local time in case you want to listen in from remote). Gr=FC=DFe, Carsten MONDAY, July 21, 2014 0900-1130 Morning Session I Ontario APP appsawg Applications Area Working Group WG - = Combined with APPAREA Canadian OPS v6ops IPv6 Operations WG 1300-1500 Afternoon Session I Ontario APP httpbis Hypertext Transfer Protocol WG Ballroom INT intarea Internet Area Working Group WG Salon A SEC jose Javascript Object Signing and Encryption = WG 1520-1650 Afternoon Session II Territories INT *** 6tisch IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE = 802.15.4e WG Ontario SEC tls Transport Layer Security WG Ballroom TSV taps Transport Services WG TUESDAY, July 22, 2014 0900-1130 Morning Session I Ontario APP uta Using TLS in Applications WG Territories TSV tsvwg Transport Area Working Group WG 1300-1400 Afternoon Session I Ontario INT *** lwig Light-Weight Implementation Guidance WG Canadian TSV tsvwg Transport Area Working Group WG 1420-1620 Afternoon Session II Territories APP httpbis Hypertext Transfer Protocol WG Ontario OPS v6ops IPv6 Operations WG 1640-1840 Afternoon Session III Tudor 7/8 RTG *** roll Routing Over Low power and Lossy = networks WG WEDNESDAY, July 23, 2014 0900-1130 Morning Session I Tudor 7/8 SEC *** ace Authentication and Authorization for = Constrained Environments WG 1300-1500 Afternoon Session I Ballroom OPS ucan Use Cases for Autonomic Networking BOF Tudor 7/8 TSV tcpinc TCP Increased Security WG 1520-1650 Afternoon Session II Territories APP *** core Constrained RESTful Environments WG THURSDAY, July 24, 2014 0900-1130 Morning Session I Tudor 7/8 INT *** 6lo IPv6 over Networks of = Resource-constrained Nodes WG Salon B SEC httpauth Hypertext Transfer Protocol = Authentication WG - 1000-1130 1300-1500 Afternoon Session I Canadian SEC saag Security Area Open Meeting Ballroom TSV rmcat RTP Media Congestion Avoidance = Techniques WG 1520-1720 Afternoon Session II Canadian INT dnssd Extensions for Scalable DNS Service = Discovery WG Salon A OPS eman Energy Management WG Ontario RTG rtgarea Routing Area Open Meeting Manitoba SEC oauth Web Authorization Protocol WG 1730-1830 Afternoon Session III Salon B APP *** core Constrained RESTful Environments WG Ontario SEC tls Transport Layer Security WG Ballroom TSV rmcat RTP Media Congestion Avoidance = Techniques WG FRIDAY, July 25, 2014 0900-1130 Morning Session I Canadian INT homenet Home Networking WG 1150-1320 Afternoon Session I Salon B SEC *** dice DTLS In Constrained Environments WG From nobody Mon Jun 23 23:15:17 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C0791B2843 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 23:15:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.652 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.652 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 2IUj8EMI-ffv for ; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 23:15:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FAE11B283E for ; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 23:15:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.143] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MFMIO-1Ww2DT3nlc-00EMLC; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 08:15:12 +0200 Message-ID: <53A91773.3090404@gmx.net> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 08:15:15 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Richardson References: <064.c9b9851f91829225528c4b38397484da@tools.ietf.org> <53A5CC96.1000007@gmx.net> <4125.1403451836@sandelman.ca> In-Reply-To: <4125.1403451836@sandelman.ca> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Ax0hKi3AqHMboqbBFB9wTqM2qPTUAmdcb" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:mVeLQ1vpDpuUvxV/Czo32GveTw2/gfDnIv2xi3wyfRj0QcA8cgV +dVISjRgbtRkEf6EhYf1LW+AjOV0Jyq6eu4YWPSV5w5swbctC51BqJbBUJ3V2BycIh79gHO 8RiQadAJbvzUHWFXEfcPEaQeMgEKtNaMSNmGc+P+yM9HbGfnGzMTIl5FYSKWh6zd9jMzLIY RzOOAjfQsa60+qxfXYNPw== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/y3H9ztfFSIOL3iKjlNDeorpU-1g Cc: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Dtls-iot] Fwd: [dice] #2 (profile): Keep-Alive Extension X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 06:15:16 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --Ax0hKi3AqHMboqbBFB9wTqM2qPTUAmdcb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Michael, On 06/22/2014 05:43 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: > > When used with DTLS then one can assume that session resumption i= s used. >=20 > Perhaps rather than assume, one could say that, "since the upload is on= an > irregular and unpredicable basis and due to renumbering and NAT, may > originate from unpredictable origins, only a new session, or a resumed = can be > used" >=20 A much better wording. Thanks > > 2) Client-initiated, regular data uploads. >=20 > > This is a variation of case (1) whereby data gets uploaded more r= egularly > > so that the DTLS context is still setup. If neither NAT bindings = nor IP > > address changes occurred then the DTLS record layer will not noti= ce any > > changes. >=20 > (and, this is clearly a place where IPv6 has a definite win) Yes, but I am not sure whether I should state that since this document isn't really about the pros and cons of IPv6. Ciao Hannes --Ax0hKi3AqHMboqbBFB9wTqM2qPTUAmdcb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTqRd0AAoJEGhJURNOOiAtNyIH+gIFtAqKX8MTMqMee5q2BMhz wDmNDFPxCDwAHG2iyXCiQ0MayAE55zsqw0gP08TuFDOkkvq6Q3UJGbfhFy23l1fM ThICNYL3N3xLWucTQ3jutqpJZeqYmFN+RfRHfJcPurhP/lzs5rhAwIWpK2loS7pV TqjUc8yR86SQfmaiQCR9PXXD7DCLNTXd4l/kNZymz6cMy+Zi0Ihy5lrZVb/Dj33u mC9d7IQ+Ilwa4/djNX3rm35bYtXbk0/Y3qkKlfvrZ59ceMMgRaeVpM5+f2Jxc0kX qUC/Z6Sy7MYVzXtdenaOJXF7h8k9zQeTR9MDEnZqbsJHOsYrmciSPf+42VoOESQ= =YiOq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Ax0hKi3AqHMboqbBFB9wTqM2qPTUAmdcb-- From nobody Fri Jun 27 00:13:30 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB3021B2F82 for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 00:13:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 qxaGe1pzAV1l for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 00:13:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1973E1B2ACB for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 00:13:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.143] ([80.92.115.50]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LiY3U-1WO3j60UKy-00cdkG for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 09:13:24 +0200 Message-ID: <53AD199B.1060205@gmx.net> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 09:13:31 +0200 From: Hannes Tschofenig User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7FKNct7X6j3NXGkqI4l1u412IoN6FaaFA" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:mLZiqYs3i+dcD9GMMouP2waIgFEL8bV6xI9mgqupnu5YyM7V9P3 tONsN7sra/Nu7mixnkX11y7Ci+H8Axc3Iy5EkgNk1U/99ezvtpQsoRNskTsZ8EQjQfAfx1p fjk/9bEHZcTDmfHp8dU0VjCJ3bc6aQE3g736Y0NGO0PJwGcXyK9QWTVEe0HX+vqtx+BKzAI vqlp8XkR5v27aUvmA8FTQ== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/e7t2ynwb__bv-JjedjjBMQPcz_E Subject: [Dtls-iot] DTLS Profile Draft Update X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 07:13:28 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --7FKNct7X6j3NXGkqI4l1u412IoN6FaaFA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, I have created an updated draft based on the issues listed at http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dice/trac/report/1 The (not-yet-submitted) version can be found here: http://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/dice/draft-ietf-dice-profile-02.txt Let me know if you have some feedback and whether there are other open issues that could/should be added to the tracker. Ciao Hannes --7FKNct7X6j3NXGkqI4l1u412IoN6FaaFA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTrRmbAAoJEGhJURNOOiAthTYH/1yu63IfFAAnikzlQCnFPJsR KinA9Ucz/F7DW66neEc15PK/RIPT3SPBmdFGkmkpkHToM5taFsh0jCo2yuVi4QDV R4LhJoDRDKqt+GtUZy0Lp7Ksv9bPJcdpk5pn7mjisVulgHcN3hWvS06JK6Jt0vNL IJtTpxZ+rQrC0GRJwYs4KGnFFtGHJwIA7eSnh4NTz65vKlJKrGCe1P0SaZ1im9ge ZFZrQTqa7eShFPMppqeDvOA1Jeuw4SL3bp9yzl0oWgfTtd0gVog6I5pKBKihju1d oTVgqel/OPTaZsDN3H1+tq2exJ2EbWFyMlLJNrnzRjfsCMZpffH5xw/xLOuSbtw= =f/nl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --7FKNct7X6j3NXGkqI4l1u412IoN6FaaFA--