Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Objective BRSKI_JP not formally defined and name is confusing #60

Open
EskoDijk opened this issue Oct 13, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Objective BRSKI_JP not formally defined and name is confusing #60

EskoDijk opened this issue Oct 13, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels
issue-for-wg Issue needs to be taken to WG for discussion.

Comments

@EskoDijk
Copy link
Collaborator

Problem with BRSKI_JP: it's used in an example as GRASP objective, but not formally introduced.

Also the name is a problem: it sounds like a Join Proxy advertising itself as a Join Proxy to Pledges. But that's not the case: the document says it's used by a Registrar to advertise its CoAPS (CoAP-over-DTLS) service. So to stay consistent with earlier and other work we should use e.g.

BRSKI_REG (given that BRSKI_REGISTRAR would be quite long)

Also this fits with the name

BRSKI_RJP

which can be interpreted as "BRSKI Registrar Join Proxy protocol". This is the special access protocol that uses a CBOR element.

@EskoDijk
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Update: the BRSKI_JP is actually defined in constrained-voucher. (Should it be moved?)

Maybe discuss here why the objective name is "BRSKI_JP" since the objective is for the registrar to announce itself?
Or should we read objective the other way around i.e. "objective is for the Join Proxy to connect to me"? (confusing)

@mcr
Copy link
Member

mcr commented Oct 14, 2023

I think that the JP part referred to the protocol we are advertising, but it does seem wrong now.

@EskoDijk EskoDijk added the issue-for-wg Issue needs to be taken to WG for discussion. label Feb 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
issue-for-wg Issue needs to be taken to WG for discussion.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants