Sorry. I made a mistake; I meant to say RFC 9338.

--
Daisuke

2023年1月19日(木) 21:02 Carsten Bormann <[email protected]>:

> On 2023-01-19, at 12:47, AJITOMI Daisuke <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > But it seems to me that they are all based on the old specification
> (RFC8152). I am looking for an implementation that conforms to the new one
> (RFC9052).
>
> Just in case people reading this misunderstand the role of RFC 9052:
>
> RFC 9052 (and the other RFCs in STD96) do not create a new format, they
> just present the format defined in RFC 8152 in an improved way.
>
> Of course, the one exception is RFC 9338 (countersignatures); this is
> indeed a new take on countersignatures (countersignatures V2) relative to
> RFC 8152.
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>
>
_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose

Reply via email to