EskoDijk
commented
2 years ago If we want to get this right, some discussion in our meeting may be useful for each item.
- pinning of a raw key / RPK is also clearly an Extends of 8366 (which mentions that for 'future work').
- I don't see pinning of a raw key as an Amends of 8995 because 8995 only considers pinned certificates. So isn't that an Extends?
- The usage of CoAPS instead of HTTPS for BRSKI - is that an Extends of 8995 , or not? Maybe it's better to see our new document as a new protocol that happens to reuse BRSKI, but people using classic BRSKI need not necessarily be aware of this fact that there's a CoAP variant also. So that would argue against using "Extends".
- Short resource names doesn't Extend the HTTPS BRSKI; as it's only applicable for CoAPS BRSKI. So for a HTTPS BRSKI implementer the short names are not a valid implementation option as so we could argue that this does not "Extend" HTTPS BRSKI with that option.
- Can a clarification of something be an "Amends" ? (see reference below)
Overall I'm not sure I get the meaning of Extends / Amends / Updates and how it should be applied. Is there a good reference to it? Is it https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-kuehlewind-update-tag#section-3 ?
the list is perhaps comprehensive now, close #221