[Nfd-dev] Update on NDNCERT protocol

[Zhiyi Zhang]

Hi Junxiao,

Thanks for the feedback, here are some questions regarding your comments.
Could you please help to clarify?

1. sec 2.1.2 why we need version + segment components? I understand the use
of version component but why bother segment component? What's the benefit
of using these two rather than timestamp?
2. sec 2.1.2 yes I am considering RSA OAEP, the main reason for using RSA
instead of the session key (e.g., ECDH) is the round trip -- ECDH requires
an additional round trip to set up the session (which may be too costly for
an informational query).
3. sec 2.1.4 do we need to consider the evolvability here? given it's an
application layer protocol and all fields clearly defined.
4. sec 2.2.2 you suggested the type name be email and full name, do you
expect them to be pre-defined as TLV types? If so, it's really a usability
issue because different CAs may require totally different information for
the probe.
5. sec 2.2.2. regarding multiple available names in PROBE reply, I don't
think so? given it's not an important feature. And we may not want to
bother CA to design a function to output multiple namespaces?

Best,
Zhiyi

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 1:05 PM Junxiao Shi <shijunxiao at email.arizona.edu>
wrote:

> Hi Zhiyi
>
> See my review in attachment.
>
> Also, in order to prevent spam, please remove my email and link my name to
> https://yoursunny.com/m/ where readers can find my email in protected
> format.
>
> Yours, Junxiao
>
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 2:32 PM Zhiyi Zhang <zhiyi at cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Based on our discussion on NFD call on Feb 11, Feb 13, and Feb 18, I have
>> organized the results into a new version of the spec of NDNCERT.
>> Here is the link:
>> https://github.com/named-data/ndncert/wiki/NDNCERT-Protocol-0.3
>>
>> People interested in this work please help review the spec and we can
>> improve the NDNCERT protocol together.
>> Any comments/suggestions/criticisms are welcome.
>>
>> Best,
>> Zhiyi
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/pipermail/nfd-dev/attachments/20200302/9a6d6579/attachment.html>