1 as it is important to be able to support oob cases. 2013/4/20 Matt Miller <[email protected]>: > I suppose my answer to this poll (either Karen's or Mike's wording) is "Yes". > > However, while I do think that key information exchanges outside of the > JWE/JWS headers are important, I do think a reference to the resultant key is > mandatory. > > > - m&m > > Matt Miller < [email protected] > > Cisco Systems, Inc. > > > On Apr 11, 2013, at 5:59 PM, Karen O'Donoghue <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Issue #15 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jose/trac/ticket/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 19^th (or earlier). >> _______________________________________________ >> jose mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose > > > _______________________________________________ > jose mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose >
-- Nat Sakimura (=nat) Chairman, OpenID Foundation http://nat.sakimura.org/ @_nat_en _______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
