+1 hannes - it is definitely an issue - if we don't provide a clear path to interop, why standardize
Mike Prorock CTO, Founder https://mesur.io/ On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 9:14 AM Tschofenig, Hannes <hannes.tschofenig= [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Laurence, > > > > the problem is that the enc is currently an opaque blob where the format > is determined by the implementation of the selected library. > > This means that there is zero interoperability between different > implementations unless they happen to produce the same encoding. > > > > I see this as a problem. > > > > Ciao > > Hannes > > > > > > *Von:* lgl island-resort.com <[email protected]> > *Gesendet:* Freitag, 14. Juli 2023 16:46 > *An:* Orie Steele <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Tschofenig, Hannes (T CST SEA-DE) <[email protected]>; > Henk Birkholz <[email protected]>; Hannes Tschofenig < > [email protected]>; cose <[email protected]> > *Betreff:* Re: [COSE] COSE-HPKE and the Single Algorithm Discussion > > > > > > On Jul 14, 2023, at 6:01 AM, Orie Steele <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > You mean `enc` ? > > In the case of DHKems, a public key represented as opaque bytes. > > In the case of PQKems some other opaque bytes. > > > > Our choice for enc doesn’t seem like a big issue to me because it only > affects the encode/decode of one message. By contrast the algorithm ID is > used in many places through out the COSE infrastructure (e.g., alg > negotiation, key use…). > > > > LL > > > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose >
_______________________________________________ COSE mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
