Thanks again for all the good comment and discussions on the list!

We have submitted -05. Changes are:

- Added reference to IEEE 802.1AR DevID and made optimization for IEEE 802.1AR 
DevID.
- Rephrased "compress" in the whole document. We will change the file name 
later.
- Made it more clear that X.509 version in included in the CBOR certificate 
type.
- Omitted 'signature' instead of 'singatureAlgorithm'. Now the algorithm comes 
just before the signature value.
- Added support of emailAddress / IA5String in issuer and subject. This was 
easy.
- changed so utf8Strings have a positive sign.
- Change time to unwrapped CBOR epoch time (~time). This saves 1 byte for time 
> 2050
- Added that the value "99991231235959Z" (no expiration date) is encoded as 
CBOR null. This is quite commonly used in IoT certificates. This saves 4 bytes 
when used.
- Use CDDL for CBOR OID as defined in draft-ietf-cbor-tags-oid
- Added CBOR encoding for uthorityKeyIdentifier and subjectKeyIdentifier which 
are heavily used by IEEE 802.1AR DevID (at least one of them are mandated 
depending on type of cert).
- Added optimization for the hardwareModuleName type of otherName, which is 
mandatory to use in IEEE 802.1AR DevID
- Added CBOR encoding for cRLDistributionPoints and authorityInfoAccess, which 
are both used in basically all HTTPS certificates on the web.
- Added support for registeredID. This was trivial and registeredID is used 
e.g. by the GSMA eUICC PKI Certificate Policy (SGP 14).
- Added considerations for expert reviewers.
- Moved SHA-1 signature algorithms to negative 2 byte encodings: -256 and -255
- Added a public private ECDSA key pair turning the example certificates into 
test vectors. An implementation can now create and verify the example RFC 7925 
certificates.

Cheers,
John

-----Original Message-----
From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, 2 December 2020 at 08:56
To: Göran Selander <[email protected]>, Göran Selander 
<[email protected]>, Martin Furuhed <[email protected]>, 
Shahid Raza <[email protected]>, John Mattsson <[email protected]>, 
Joel Hoglund <[email protected]>, John Mattsson <[email protected]>, 
Joel Höglund <[email protected]>
Subject: New Version Notification for 
draft-mattsson-cose-cbor-cert-compress-05.txt


A new version of I-D, draft-mattsson-cose-cbor-cert-compress-05.txt
has been successfully submitted by =?utf-8?q?John_Preu=C3=9F_Mattsson?= and 
posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:           draft-mattsson-cose-cbor-cert-compress
Revision:       05
Title:          CBOR Encoding of X.509 Certificates (CBOR Certificates)
Document date:  2020-12-01
Group:          Individual Submission
Pages:          29
URL:            
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-mattsson-cose-cbor-cert-compress-05.txt
Status:         
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mattsson-cose-cbor-cert-compress/
Htmlized:       
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-mattsson-cose-cbor-cert-compress
Htmlized:       
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mattsson-cose-cbor-cert-compress-05
Diff:           
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-mattsson-cose-cbor-cert-compress-05

Abstract:
   This document specifies a CBOR encoding of X.509 certificates.  The
   resulting certificates are called CBOR Certificates.  The CBOR
   encoding supports a large subset of RFC 5280, while at the same time
   significantly reduces the size of certificates compatible with RFC
   7925 and IEEE 802.1AR (DevIDs).  When used to re-encode DER encoded
   X.509 certificates, the CBOR encoding can in many cases reduce the
   size of RFC 7925 profiled certificates with over 50%.  The CBOR
   encoding can also be used encode "natively signed" CBOR certificates,
   which does not require re-encoding for the signature to be verified.
   The document also specifies COSE headers as well as a TLS certificate
   type for CBOR certificates.




Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat



_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose

Reply via email to