Göran Selander <[email protected]> wrote: > We have struggled with naming. And as names have been updated, not all > text has followed. The draft is defining a CBOR encoding of PKIX > certificates and two different ways of signing them. One which requires > re-encoding as ASN.1/DER and one which does not, each having advantages > and disadvantages. It seems to me that both variants have support in > the working group.
CBOR compressed (X509) Certificates
would be fine with me.
I believe that the second way of signing (CBOR artifacts) belongs in another
document.
> I think it makes sense to use the term "CBOR certificate" (shorthand
> for "CBOR encoded X.509 certificate") as a common term for both
It is a hard no for me to call them CBOR certificates.
For the reason that Carsten gave: I want something completely divorced from
the X.509 legacy.
-- Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ COSE mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
