From: COSE [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Jones Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2016 11:27 AM To: Justin Richer <[email protected]>; cose <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [COSE] Adoption of RSA and alternative algorithms Responses inline… From: COSE [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Justin Richer Sent: Friday, July 29, 2016 7:04 AM To: cose <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: [COSE] Adoption of RSA and alternative algorithms Hi all, hope that everyone is recovering from Berlin. As discussed in the meeting last week, the working group is considering additional work on RSA and other algorithms in the COSE messages framework. These would be published in a document separate from the core draft that is now on its journey to RFC-land. The chairs would like to gauge the sentiment of the working group on a number of items related to this proposed work. Please respond with your answers to the list. 1) Do you think it’s necessary or worthwhile to define RSA and other additional algorithms in the COSE messages framework? A) Yes, we should do an RSA/other-algs document B) No, we shouldn’t do an RSA/other-algs document C) Yes, but not right now D) I need more information (please ask what you want to know) E) I don’t give a flying rat whether this gets done or not A) Yes, we should do an RSA document now. These are needed now. Other algorithms can come later and be registered then. 2) If the work is adopted, where should it be done? A) Here in COSE (we’ll keep the group open for this item) B) In other working group (please specify where; note that ACE is a possible option) C) I need more information (ask what you want to know) D) I don’t give a flying rat where this happens A) Here in COSE (we’ll keep the group open for this item) 3) If the work is adopted, which draft is a good starting point? A) Jim’s draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-schaad-cose-alg-01 B) Mike’s draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-cose-rsa-00 C) Some other draft (please tell us which one it is or offer to write it yourself) D) I need more information (ask what you want to know) E) I don’t give a flying rat which document we start with B) Mike’s draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-cose-rsa-00 because it already has the numeric assignments in place and doesn’t have any other algorithms besides the RSA algorithms The numeric assignments are wrong as I have reordered the set of algorithms after the fork occurred. Jim We’re going to keep this thread open for two weeks at the AD’s request, and the chairs will try to make a consensus call at the end of that time period. Thank you, — Justin & Kepeng, your COSE chairs \. - - . ' _ , -`. ' _,' _,' ' ,-' _/ ' ,-' \ _/ ' ,' \ _' ' ' _\' ' , _,-' \ _________ \,_,--' \ \\_______\ <smb://_______/> \ \\+=+=+=+\ <smb://+=+=+=+/> \ \\=+=+=+=\ <smb://=+=+=+=/> \ \\+=+=+=+\ <smb://+=+=+=+/> \ \\=+=+=+=\________ \ \\+=+=+=+____----)) \ \`---------.)))\\ \ ||+=+=+=+=+=\\ /\\ \ ||___________\\/ \\ \ ||------------\\ ejm \|| \\
_______________________________________________ COSE mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
