Mohamed Boucadair has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-cose-03-01: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-cose/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I understand that this recharter is to include required anchor for some already adopted WG documents. Thanks for taking care of this. # Charter not a progress report Part of the new charter seems like a progress report than a charter text. For example, I’m not sure I would maintain the following notes in the final charter: (1) (draft-ietf-cose-tsa-tst-header-parameter-05, reached IESG evaluation before the gap in the charter was noticed) (2) (the draft with the now somewhat dated file name draft-ietf-cose-merkle-tree-proofs-13, was in IETF last call until 2025-05-13 and is waiting on a recharter before it is placed on the IESG ballot) (3) (draft-ietf-cose-hash-envelope-05, approaching WGLC) We may also delete “The WG has adopted and mostly completed work in the following three areas” for a better flow vs. “The WG currently has five work items”. Please find below some additional comments: # Both cited RFCs were obsoleted CURRENT: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE, RFC 8152) describes how to create and process signatures, message authentication codes, and encryption using Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR, RFC 7049) for serialization. COSE additionally describes a representation for cryptographic keys. # 6TiSCH was concluded, consider removing from the “is being used” list # I guess these are examples not definitive list OLD: COSE has been picked up and is being used both by a number of groups within the IETF (i.e., ACE, CORE, ANIMA, 6TiSCH and SUIT) and outside the IETF (i.e., W3C and FIDO). NEW: COSE has been picked up and is being used both by a number of groups within the IETF (e.g., ACE, CORE, ANIMA, and SUIT) and outside the IETF (e.g., W3C and FIDO). # I guess we meant RFC 9052 (and/or RFC 9338 ?) CURRENT: The specification has advanced to STD status. # Document types CURRENT: The COSE working group will deal with two types of documents going forward: 1. Documents that describe the use of cryptographic algorithms in COSE. 2. Documents which describe additional attributes for COSE. 3. Documents that define header parameters to be used in COSE objects. s/two/three # Missing “.” OLD: of COSE, with a general goal to complete the listed work items before adopting new work NEW: of COSE, with a general goal to complete the listed work items before adopting new work. # Single place for collaboration with other WGs This is currently spread in many places, e.g., The working group will coordinate its progress with the ACE, SUIT and CORE working groups to ensure that it is fulfilling the needs of these constituencies to the extent relevant to their work. Other groups may be added to this list as the set of use cases is expanded, in consultation with the responsible Area Director. … The working group will collaborate and coordinate with other IETF WGs such as TLS, UTA, LAKE to understand and validate the requirements and solution. Better to have those in one single place. # Stale reference • draft-ietf-uta-tls13-iot-profile-00 Cheers, Med _______________________________________________ COSE mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
