Hi Madison, Changes 1), 2) and 4) are completed for each of the following media type templates:
https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/eat+cwt https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/eat+jwt https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/eat-bun+cbor https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/eat-bun+json https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/eat-ucs+cbor https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/eat-ucs+json Regarding requested change 3), the email address is already listed as "r...@ietf.org" in the templates. The "@" character is masked as "&" in the published templates as part of an anti-spam measure used across all IANA protocol parameter registries. Thank you. Best regards, David Dong IANA Services Sr. Specialist On Fri May 23 14:33:01 2025, mchu...@staff.rfc-editor.org wrote: > IANA, > > Please make the minor updates below to the following media types in > the "Media Types" registry (https://www.iana.org/assignments/media- > types/media-types.xhtml). These updates apply to each media type: > > application/eat+cwt > application/eat+jwt > application/eat-bun+cbor > application/eat-bun+json > application/eat-ucs+cbor > application/eat-ucs+json > > 1) Update "case-insensitive" to "case insensitive" (no hyphen). > > OLD: > Optional parameters: "eat_profile" (EAT profile in string format. > OIDs must use the > dotted-decimal notation. The parameter value is case-insensitive.) > > NEW: > Optional parameters: "eat_profile" (EAT profile in string format. > OIDs must use the > dotted-decimal notation. The parameter value is case insensitive.) > > > 2) Add "and" before "Replying Parties". > > OLD: > Applications that use this media type: Attesters, Verifiers, > Endorsers and Reference-Value providers, Relying Parties that > need > to transfer EAT payloads over HTTP(S), CoAP(S), and other > transports. > > NEW: > Applications that use this media type: Attesters, Verifiers, > Endorsers and Reference-Value providers, and Relying Parties > that > need to transfer EAT payloads over HTTP(S), CoAP(S), and other > transports. > > > 3) Update "&" to "@". > > OLD: > Person & email address to contact for further information: RATS WG > mailing list (rats&ietf.org) > > NEW: > Person & email address to contact for further information: RATS WG > mailing list (r...@ietf.org) > > > 4) Please add "Provisional registration: no" after "Author/Change > controller: IETF" > > Thank you, > RFC Editor/mc > > > > On May 7, 2025, at 4:15 PM, Madison Church <mchu...@staff.rfc- > > editor.org> wrote: > > > > *Resending with the correct name in the greeting! Apologies for the > > misspelling.* > > > > All, > > > > With Laurence's approval, we have now received all necessary > > approvals and consider AUTH48 complete (see https://www.rfc- > > editor.org/auth48/rfc9782). > > > > Please note that this document normatively references RFC-to-be-9781, > > which is still currently in AUTH48 (see https://www.rfc- > > editor.org/cluster_info.php?cid=C522). Once RFC-to-be-9781 finishes > > AUTH48, we will move both documents forward in the publication > > process. > > > > Thank you for your attention and guidance during AUTH48! > > > > Best, > > RFC Editor/mc > > > >> On May 7, 2025, at 4:11 PM, Madison Church <mchu...@staff.rfc- > >> editor.org> wrote: > >> > >> All, > >> > >> With Lance’s approval, we have now received all necessary approvals > >> and consider AUTH48 complete (see https://www.rfc- > >> editor.org/auth48/rfc9782). > >> > >> Please note that this document normatively references RFC-to-be- > >> 9781, which is still currently in AUTH48 (see https://www.rfc- > >> editor.org/cluster_info.php?cid=C522). Once RFC-to-be-9781 finishes > >> AUTH48, we will move both documents forward in the publication > >> process. > >> > >> Thank you for your attention and guidance during AUTH48! > >> > >> Best, > >> RFC Editor/mc > >> > >>> On May 7, 2025, at 3:27 PM, Laurence Lundblade > >>> <l...@securitytheory.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> I approve. > >>> > >>> LL > >>> > >>> > >>>> On May 7, 2025, at 12:45 PM, Madison Church <mchu...@staff.rfc- > >>>> editor.org> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi Henk, > >>>> > >>>> Thank you for your response! We have noted your approval here: > >>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9782. > >>>> > >>>> Once we receive approval from Lawrence, we will move this document > >>>> forward in the publication process. > >>>> > >>>> Thank you! > >>>> RFC Editor/mc > >>>> > >>>>> On May 7, 2025, at 12:50 PM, Henk Birkholz > >>>>> <henk.birkholz@ietf.contact> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi Madison, > >>>>> > >>>>> please add my approval, too. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks a ton! > >>>>> > >>>>> Henk > >>>>> > >>>>> On 07.05.25 19:07, Madison Church wrote: > >>>>>> Hi Thomas, > >>>>>> Thank you for your reply! We have noted your approval on the > >>>>>> AUTH48 status page (see https://www.rfc- > >>>>>> editor.org/auth48/rfc9782). > >>>>>> Once we receive approvals from Henk and Laurence, we will move > >>>>>> this document forward in the publication process. > >>>>>> Thank you! > >>>>>> RFC Editor/mc > >>>>>>> On May 7, 2025, at 12:00 PM, Thomas Fossati > >>>>>>> <thomas.foss...@linaro.org> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Madison, all, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, 7 May 2025 at 16:40, Madison Church > >>>>>>> <mchu...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hi Authors, *Debbie, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> *Debbie - As responsible AD for this document, please review > >>>>>>>> the removal of RFC 7519 from the Normative References section > >>>>>>>> and let us know if you approve. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Authors - Thank you for your reply! We have updated the files > >>>>>>>> as requested and all of our questions have been addressed. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Please review the document carefully to ensure satisfaction as > >>>>>>>> we do not make changes once it has been published as an RFC. > >>>>>>>> Contact us with any further updates or with your approval of > >>>>>>>> the document in its current form. We will await approvals from > >>>>>>>> each author prior to moving forward in the publication > >>>>>>>> process. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The files have been posted here (please refresh): > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782.txt > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782.pdf > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782.html > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782.xml > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please > >>>>>>>> refresh): > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782-diff.html > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782-rfcdiff.html (side > >>>>>>>> by side) > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782-auth48diff.html > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782-auth48rfcdiff.html > >>>>>>>> (side by side) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks much, LGTM. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> cheers! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: > >>>>>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9782 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thank you, > >>>>>>>> RFC Editor/mc > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On May 3, 2025, at 3:07 PM, Thomas Fossati > >>>>>>>>> <thomas.foss...@linaro.org> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi Madison, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 at 20:21, Madison Church > >>>>>>>>> <mchu...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> 1) Thank you for your explanation. We have updated the > >>>>>>>>>> following usage of <tt> for consistency: > >>>>>>>>>> <tt>eat_profile</tt> claim to "eat_profile" claim (per use > >>>>>>>>>> in RFC-to-be-9711) > >>>>>>>>>> <tt>eat_profile</tt> parameter to "eat_profile" parameter > >>>>>>>>>> +cwt to <tt>+cwt</tt> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Note that the following terms use <tt> tags in running text > >>>>>>>>>> but do not contain <tt> tags in Tables 1 and 2. We have left > >>>>>>>>>> each instance as is. > >>>>>>>>>> application/eat+cwt > >>>>>>>>>> application/eat-ucs+json > >>>>>>>>>> application/eat-ucs+cbor > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Please review the updates regarding <tt> tagging closely and > >>>>>>>>>> let us know if any further updates are needed. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Works for us, thanks. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> 7) <!-- [rfced] We note that RFC 7519 is not cited > >>>>>>>>>>>> anywhere in this > >>>>>>>>>>>> document. Please let us know if there is an appropriate > >>>>>>>>>>>> place in the > >>>>>>>>>>>> text to reference this RFC. Otherwise, we will remove it > >>>>>>>>>>>> from the > >>>>>>>>>>>> Normative References section. --> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> OK with removing. JWT is brought in "transitively" through > >>>>>>>>>>> EAT. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 2) Upon further review, we found a place to cite this > >>>>>>>>>> reference in the text instead of removing it from the > >>>>>>>>>> normative references entirely. Please review the updated > >>>>>>>>>> text below and let us know if you approve (or if you would > >>>>>>>>>> prefer to remove the reference as originally suggested). > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Original: > >>>>>>>>>> Figure 2 illustrates the six EAT wire formats and how they > >>>>>>>>>> relate to > >>>>>>>>>> each other. [EAT] defines four of them (CWT, JWT and > >>>>>>>>>> Detached EAT > >>>>>>>>>> Bundle in its JSON and CBOR flavours), whilst [UCCS] defines > >>>>>>>>>> UCCS and > >>>>>>>>>> UJCS. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Current: > >>>>>>>>>> Figure 2 illustrates the six EAT wire formats and how they > >>>>>>>>>> relate to > >>>>>>>>>> each other. [EAT] defines four of them (CBOR Web Token > >>>>>>>>>> (CWT), JSON > >>>>>>>>>> Web Token (JWT) [JWT], and the detached EAT bundle in its > >>>>>>>>>> JSON and > >>>>>>>>>> CBOR flavours), while [UCCS] defines the Unprotected CWT > >>>>>>>>>> Claims Set > >>>>>>>>>> (UCCS) and Unprotected JWT Claims Sets (UJCS). > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> We prefer it without the JWT reference. > >>>>>>>>> The media types are for EAT, UCCS and UJCS, not JWT. > >>>>>>>>> A clickable reference in that opening sentence leads away > >>>>>>>>> from that. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> We think the document is OK without a JWT reference. > >>>>>>>>> The CWT reference is just there for the “+cwt” registration, > >>>>>>>>> not > >>>>>>>>> because it is needed for any of the EAT media type > >>>>>>>>> registrations. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> cheers, thanks! > >>>>>>>>> Thomas, Henk & Laurence > >> > > -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
