Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: >>The four I had in mind were TLSM, EUSM, SBSM, and SNMP/BEEP. Prior to >>the meeting the WG had ruled out the first three and during the meeting >>the fourth was also shelved, leaving none. > > > This does not match my recollection. My understanding was that the WG > decided prior to the IETF-63 that it will follow the transport mapping > security model (TMSM) approach, which was initially called "transport > layer security model" (TLSM). Which is the architectural model extracted from TLSM. > Under the discussion during the IETF-63 > meeting were the selection of transport layer security protocols that > could be used, such as TLS, SSH, DTLS, and BEEP. This is inline with > what <draft-kaushik-isms-btsm-01> says: > > This document leverages the TMSM framework and describes the use of > the BEEP for securing SNMPv3. This specification describes BEEP > Transport Mapping Security Model. > > I don't think BEEP was even on the table when the discussions between > EUSM, SBSM and TMSM was made - at least it is not mentioned in the > evaluation document <draft-ietf-isms-proposal-comparison>. Juergen asked that it be presented at IETF-63, which is why I included it. Eliot _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf