Hello ACE,Following the discussion at the virtual interim meeting this week (see [1] and slides 4-5 at [2]), I have focused on "Option 2" presented in slide 5 of [2].
You can find the changes in the commit at [3], and in the Editor's copy at [4] --- see last paragraph of Section 3.3.1 as well as the new Appendix B. Having this actually written down should make it easier to give any feedback :-)
To summarize, this doesn't change the format of 'sign_info_entry' as defined in the document body, and doesn't break any profile/implementation of this document.
On the other hand, the generalized format in Appendix B:- Is both retrocompatible and future-proof for future registered COSE algorithms, with possibly more than only Key Type as their algorithm capabilities. - If used with any of today's algorithms, it yields again the same 'sign_info_entry' format defined in the document body.
The points above apply also in case "Option 1" in slide 5 of [2] was used, but "Option 2" appears to be cleaner, less invasive and not conducive to bad usages of the generalized format by profiles of this document.
Feedback are welcome! Thanks, /Marco[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-interim-2021-ace-07-202104131000/
[2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2021-ace-07/materials/slides-interim-2021-ace-07-sessa-ace-key-groupcomm-oscore-00.pdf
[3] https://github.com/ace-wg/ace-key-groupcomm/commit/025e37429b1bf628abc2e6d94892c8cb04846ad1
[4] https://ace-wg.github.io/ace-key-groupcomm/v-12/draft-ietf-ace-key-groupcomm.html
-- Marco Tiloca Ph.D., Senior Researcher Division: Digital System Department: Computer Science Unit: Cybersecurity RISE Research Institutes of Sweden https://www.ri.se Phone: +46 (0)70 60 46 501 Isafjordsgatan 22 / Kistagången 16 SE-164 40 Kista (Sweden)
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Ace mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
