On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 05:50:33PM -0500, Russ Housley wrote: > Ben: > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > DISCUSS: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > I do see the previous discussion in > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cose/E6ApKPKlESQQSZwySJAVF1l27OE > > but I am still unclear on where exactly we can represent the octet > > string that is the HMS-LMS public key. Do we not need to define a COSE > > Key Type Parameter (i.e., label) that maps to the public key value? For > > reference, the examples in Appendix C.7.1 of RFC 8152 include key/value > > pairs with the negative map labels from > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/cose/cose.xhtml#key-type-parameters > > corresponding to the key type in question. > > Hopefully I'm just confused and missing where this is already done, but > > marking as a Discuss point in case I'm not. (The linked > > cose-wg/Examples seem to be using a JSON structure to describe the input > > to the example generation, with the "public" and "private" members of > > the "key" that do not seem to correspond to anything that I can find at > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/jose/jose.xhtml#web-key-parameters, and > > which would in any case not directly apply to the *COSE* usage.) > > I suggest: > > 6.3. COSE Key Type Parameters Registry Entry > > The new entry in the "COSE Key Type Parameters" registry [IANA] has > the following columns: > > Key Type: TBD (Value to be assigned above by IANA) > > Name: pub > > Label: TBD (Value to be assigned by IANA) > > CBOR Type: bstr > > Description: Public key for HSS/LMS hash-based digital signature > > Reference: This document (Number to be assigned by RFC Editor)
That's basically what I had in mind; thanks! (We could perhaps number the different TBDs but this case is not too complicated...) -Ben _______________________________________________ COSE mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
