On Mar 19, 2013, at 8:17 AM, Matt Miller (mamille2) <[email protected]> wrote:

> In thinking about the JWK parameter registry, I have a couple of 
> questions/concerns.
> 
> 1) Should JWK parameter names be absolutely unique, or are they potentially 
> tied to a specific JWK type?  In looking at the specs to date, I think 
> there's only one case where a parameter name is re-used ("d" for both private 
> RSA and ECC keys); currently syntactically and semantically identical, but 
> I'm not sure that's adequate.
> 
> 2) Should JWK parameters be marked as private (confidential, secret, 
> privileged, etc etc)?  The current documentation set loosely defines this 
> only because they are current split between multiple documents.  However, I 
> wonder if there is value in being much more explicit about it, including in a 
> parameter's registration.
> 
> 

And, yes, I do (now) remember there was a general call for merging JPSK into 
JWA (-:


- m&m

Matt Miller < [email protected] >
Cisco Systems, Inc.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
jose mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose

Reply via email to