Explicit the message flow

[malishav]

Marco Tiloca wrote:

As expected, the draft focuses on the EDHOC forward message flow, as it better maps against the EST expected workflow and ensures to protect the identity of the EST client. That said, can the use of the EDHOC reverse message flow be explicitly ruled out altogether?

[malishav]

As discussed in the meeting, the proposed action here is to add an explicit statement in Section 3 (Authentication) that the EST client MUST play the role of the EDHOC initiator