Sipos, Brian J. <[email protected]> wrote:
    > In looking through C509 related header parameters, I notice that there is 
no
    > C509 equivalent to the X509 sender identifiers defined in RFC 9360 [1]. Is
    > this omission intentional? Is there expected to eventually be a 
"c5c-sender"
    > equivalent parameter?

I was confused by your question.
x5*-sender are headers for COSE, and they contain certificates (or chains or
bags or sets or URLs pointing ...)
C509 is a compression of RFC5280/PKIX certificate using CBOR with a human
created "dictionary"...

I guess that you are referring to the (STILL, VERY POORLY NAMED) Natively
Signed C509 format, which *is* COSE, and thus it could take on such headers.

--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide




Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to