On Tue, 7 Oct 2025 at 16:29, Michael Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Thomas Fossati <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thomas Fossati <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > In short, see Harald's reply [2] for the details, in order to extend > >> > the acceptable "usage" values, we'd need "[...] to get IESG approval > >> > on the change. Whether you need to publish an update to RFC 9360 or > >> > an additional RFC is probably going to be decided by the WG, your > AD, > >> > and the IESG." > >> > >> > So, given the ambiguity surrounding the encoding of COSE_X509 raised > >> > by John and MCR, we may wish to bundle these two together in a brief > >> > update to RFC 9360. WDYT? > >> > >> It seems like draft-ietf-rats-msg-wrap could do this, however, it's > left the WG to > >> the IESG and IETF LC. But, not on a telechat agenda yet. > > > No, this requires further discussion with the stakeholders (TCG, Arm, > > Caliptra, etc.) > > Do you really think that's going to be that hard?
In theory, no. In practice, I can't control the timing, so I'd rather not make any assumptions that could, worst case, end up blocking CMW > > I'd rather not share fate with CMW. > > Won't you have to normatively cite this new thing anyway? No, CMW can consume *any* media type / content format once those are defined. cheers! _______________________________________________ COSE mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
