Dear COSE enthusiasts, At IETF 118, we asked the RATS WG to adopt draft-birkholz-epoch-markers [1]. There was some discussion about scope [2]:
> Dave noted that the discussion at the last IETF meeting indicated that this > work should be done in the COSE working group. Have you asked the COSE > working group? The I-D makes use of COSE_Sign1 & is specifying a vehicle for an extensible list of freshness indicators (see Section 10 in RFC9334 [3]), such as timestamps, nonces, monotonically increasing counters, etc. Does it make more sense to continue the work as a COSE WG item (because the Epoch Marker is a COSE structure) or in the RATS WG (because Epoch Markers are about freshness epochs)? Cordiali Saluti, Viele Grüße, Thomas & Henk [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-birkholz-epoch-markers [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-118-rats-202311080830/ [3] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9334.html#name-freshness _______________________________________________ COSE mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
