With no hat ... Being a little less specific on the profile details in the charter seems worthwhile to me. I don't want it to be an open invitation to come up with a third profile, though.
- m&m Matthew A. Miller On 20/04/17 01:30, Joel Höglund wrote: > Hi all, > > I support the charter, with the addition/comment below made by John > Mattsson about also keeping the RFC 7925 profile, as it is relevant for > the IoT scenarios we are working on. > > Best Regards > > Joel Höglund > >>> I just learned that IETF 6TiSCH is relying on IEEE 802.11AR profiled > X.509 >>> certificates instead of RFC 7925 profiled X.509 certificates. It > might be that the >>> CBOR compression should support both. This could be done with small >>> additions as the profiles are quite similar. I think the charter > should leave the >>> scope a bit more open on this point. > > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose > _______________________________________________ COSE mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
