Message Size Overhead of CoAP Security Protocols
draft-mattsson-core-security-overhead-02
| Document | Type |
Replaced Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | John Preuß Mattsson | ||
| Last updated | 2017-11-11 | ||
| Replaced by | draft-mattsson-lwig-security-protocol-comparison | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Replaced by draft-mattsson-lwig-security-protocol-comparison | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
This document analyzes and compares per-packet message size overheads when using different security protocols to secure CoAP. The analyzed security protocols are DTLS 1.2, DTLS 1.3, TLS 1.2, TLS 1.3, and OSCORE. DTLS and TLS are analyzed with and without compression. DTLS are analyzed with two different alternatives for header compression as well as with and without Connection ID.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)