WG, 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?
Thanks for any feedback, Brian S. [1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9360.html#section-3 > -----Original Message----- > From: Ivaylo Petrov via Datatracker <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 1:37 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: [EXT] [COSE] Publication has been requested for > draft-ietf-cose-cbor- > encoded-cert-15 > > APL external email warning: Verify sender [email protected] > before clicking links or attachments > > Ivaylo Petrov has requested publication of > draft-ietf-cose-cbor-encoded-cert- > 15 as Proposed Standard on behalf of the COSE working group. > > Please verify the document's state at > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft- > ietf-cose-cbor-encoded-cert/ > > > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ COSE mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
