Hi,
Equivalent TCG TNC spec to be announced same day as IETF RFC
Cheers,
- Ira
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary at ietf.org>
Date: Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 3:46 PM
Subject: [Nea] Protocol Action: 'PT-TLS: A TLS-based Posture Transport (PT)
Protocol' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-nea-pt-tls-08.txt)
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce at ietf.org>
Cc: nea mailing list <nea at ietf.org>, nea chair <nea-chairs at tools.ietf.org>,
RFC Editor <rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org>
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'PT-TLS: A TLS-based Posture Transport (PT) Protocol'
(draft-ietf-nea-pt-tls-08.txt) as Proposed Standard
This document is the product of the Network Endpoint Assessment Working
Group.
The IESG contact persons are Stephen Farrell and Sean Turner.
A URL of this Internet Draft is:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-nea-pt-tls/
Technical Summary
PT-TLS is a protocol that carries NEA messages over TLS.
By supporting a TLS transport, PT-TLS permits easy and
efficient and monitoring of endpoint posture after an
endpoint has been assigned an IP address. This contrasts
with PT-EAP, which is more suitable for use before an
endpoint has been assigned an IP address.
Working Group Summary
PT-TLS was carefully prepared and thoroughly reviewed
within the NEA WG over a period of more than two years.
After a call for proposals in October 2009, two proposals
for a TLS-based transport were submitted to the NEA WG.
The two were merged, taking the best features of each
and removing unneeded features and elements. The resulting
protocol received a careful review in the NEA WG including
two WGLCs with comments from more than five people, some
from industry and some from academia. There was clear WG
consensus in favor of the resulting document with no cases
of substantial disagreement.
Document Quality
While there are no known implementations of this exact
protocol, NEA WG members have many years of implementation
experience with other TLS-based posture protocols and brought
their experience to bear in designing this protocol.
Personnel
The Document Shepherd is Steve Hanna. The Iresponsible Area
Director is Stephen Farrell.
RFC Editor Note
Please delete the last paragraph of section 6, just before the
start of 6.1 on the end of page 39. The paragraph to be
deleted reads:
This delegation of namespace is analogous to the technique used
for OIDs. It can result in interoperability problems if
vendors require support for particular vendor-specific values.
However, such behavior is explicitly prohibited by this
specification, which dictates that "Posture Transport Clients
and Posture Transport Servers MUST NOT require support for
particular vendor-specific PT-TLS Error Codes in order to
interoperate with other PT-TLS compliant implementations
(although implementations MAY permit administrators to
configure them to require support for specific PT-TLS error
codes)." Similar requirements are included for PT-TLS Message
Types.
_______________________________________________
Nea mailing list
Nea at ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ids/attachments/20130102/c412156e/attachment-0001.html>