Reading this question, I believe that there's a possibility for the question to
be misinterpreted, since the sense of the question in the subject is opposite
of the sense of the question in the body. I believe that the intent of 1 and 2
were as follows:
1. Yes - Use cases where key information is exchanged by means other than the
JWS and JWE headers ARE important.
2. No - Use cases where key information is exchanged by means other than the
JWS and JWE headers ARE NOT important.
Maybe people could reply with 1 and 2 as above, so that their answers to the
question of whether these use cases are important are not are unambiguous.
-- Mike
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Karen
O'Donoghue
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 5:00 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [jose] Feedback request on jose tracker issue #15: Should at least on
key indicator be mandatory
Issue #15 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jose/trac/ticket/15. suggests requiring
that a key indicator, such as a "kid" field, be required in all JWS and JWE
headers. Are use cases where key information is exchanged by means other than
the JWS or JWE headers important?
Which of these best describes your preferences on this issue?
1. Yes.
2. No.
0. I need more information to decide.
Your reply is requested by Friday, April 19th (or earlier).
_______________________________________________
jose mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
