Authors, Is there still enough time in the draft process for C509 [1] to request another initial code point in the "C509 General Names Registry" for the Bundle Protocol Endpoint ID? This otherName form was allocated in RFC 9174 [2] and has an existing compressed CBOR form defined in RFC 9171 [3] (with a CDDL symbol "eid-structure" defined in that document). I don't think there would be much more work than referencing those existing otherName OID and the CDDL symbol (or simply copy-pasting that symbol definition), or I could propose specific text to fit in Figure 13 if desired.
I think allocating in the initial table would be easier than allocating a single code point in a separate document, but I don't want to interrupt the current document flow. Any thoughts are welcome, thanks! Brian S. [1] https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-cose-cbor-encoded-cert-06.html#se ction-11.8 [2] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9174.html#appendix-B [3] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9171#section-4.2.5.1-6
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ COSE mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
