Authors and Chairs, >From the perspective of someone without detailed familiarity of this algorithm >family, it would be helpful to have in Section 3 a more normative reference >into which part of FIPS 205 these algorithms are defined; I assume Section >10.2.1 but there is no actual normative statement to affirm this. Can this be >added to clarify?
Similarly, in draft Section 5.2 there is a normative statement about “use of KeyValidate” but I don’t see that term “KeyValidate” used elsewhere in the draft or in FIPS 205. Can this statement be updated to reference a specific section of FIPS 205 and use whatever terms are in that specification? The binding of SLH-DSA key material into the AKP structure in Section 4 also seems a little loose, based on ML-DSA definitions in the other COSE draft I can guess that only SLH-DSA seed bytes are used in the AKP fields but it would be more clear if there were normative statements in this draft similar to those in Section 4 of ML-DSA draft. The term “seed” does not actually appear anywhere in this draft, which leaves a burden on the reader to understand what is actually required for interoperability. Thanks for consideration of this feedback before progressing to IESG review. Brian S. From: Ivaylo Petrov <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2026 1:58 PM To: cose <[email protected]> Cc: Cose Chairs Wg <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: [EXT] [COSE] WGLC: draft-ietf-cose-sphincs-plus-07 (Ends 2026-04-14) APL external email warning: Verify sender [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> before clicking links or attachments Dear COSE WG members, As discussed during IETF 125, this message starts a WG Last Call (WGLC) for: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-sphincs-plus/ Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceeding with the publication of this document by replying to this email keeping [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> in copy. Please provide rationale for support and explanations or suggestions for objections. This Working Group Last Call ends on 2026-04-14 Thank you, -- Mike and Ivo COSE co-chairs Please note: Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [1]. Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any. Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be found at [3]. [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/ [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/ [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ COSE mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
