Subject: Re: [Teep] Applicability to constrained environments

From: Dapeng Liu <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 08:15:45 +0000

Hi Hannes,

In IoT environment, LPWAN may also be used as connection technology and
also  the network connection may not be always so good. So I think CBOR is
useful in this case.

Thanks,
Dapeng(Max) Liu

On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 3:25 AM Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> Hi Dave,
>
>
>
> I believe the requirement for CBOR arises when one wants to reduce the
> over-the-air overhead, which is typically the case for low power WANs or
> mesh networks.
>
>
>
> In the typical environments where TEEs are used you often have a somewhat
> good Internet connectivity, such as with smart TVs, set-top boxes,
> entertainment systems, etc.
>
>
>
> Hence, I think an IoT environment does not automatically mandate the use
> of CBOR (or a protocol like CoAP).
>
>
>
> Ciao
>
> Hannes
>
>
>
> *From:* TEEP [mailto:[email-masked]] *On Behalf Of *Dave Thaler
> *Sent:* 02 November 2017 01:57
> *To:* [email-masked]
> *Subject:* [Teep] Applicability to constrained environments
>
>
>
> As promised when I posted my review, I am starting several email threads
> for discussions on specific technical topics.
>
> This is one of them.
>
>
>
> TEEs are critical in many IoT environments, as is the ability to install
> apps after the device is originally provisioned,
>
> so I would want OTrP to be applicable (or said more generally, I would
> want IoT environments to be one of the use cases
>
> in scope for TEEP).
>
>
>
> JSON is notably inefficient for IoT environments because of its verbosity,
> and CBOR is often used instead.
>
> So I think a CBOR encoded version is needed.   That may be as simple as
> specifying it in JSON and then saying CBOR can be
>
> used simply by using the CBOR that you’d get when converting JSON to CBOR,
> which mapping is fairly well specified.
>
>
>
> It could also be done as part of a specific transport protocol binding,
> but my preference would be to keep it separate.
>
>
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> *From:* Dave Thaler
> *Sent:* Saturday, September 23, 2017 12:24 PM
> *To:* [email-masked]' <[email-masked]>
> *Subject:* Review of draft-pei-opentrustprotocol-04
>
>
>
> I’ve finally made it through a detailed review of
> draft-pei-opentrustprotocol-04 and my marked up copy is at
>
>
> https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/draft-pei-opentrustprotocol-04.pdf
>
>
>
> I have lots of editorial fixes throughout, and a number of technical
> comments/questions/issues.
>
>
>
> I’ll start separate email threads for some of them over the next several
> days.
>
>
>
> Dave
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
> information in any medium. Thank you.
> _______________________________________________
> TEEP mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teep
>