Great. Thanks Karen. Nat
2013/5/29 Karen O'Donoghue <[email protected]> > Nat, > > We definitely do not have to wait until October for the WGLC if the > documents are ready before then. Now that we have the updated drafts > published, we can proceed with the next steps... > > 1. Verify that all the agreements from the interim meeting are properly > addressed and the issues appropriately closed. > 2. Review the drafts for any final issues. > > We plan to have a series of conference calls in the next few months to > specifically address this review. Jim and I are hopeful that the WGLC for > the specifications could occur in the Berlin time frame. > > Regards, > Karen > > > On 5/28/13 10:18 PM, Nat Sakimura wrote: > > Thanks Mike. > > Is it correct to understand that most of the technical issues are > addressed with this draft? > If so, do we still have to wait until October for WGLC? Are we not ready > to go in June or July? > > In as much as it is nice to have many features, the timing is also very > important. Some folks are not allowed to use the spec unless it is final. I > know of at least one project that falls into this category unless we finish > them by this fall or we have failed in this respect. > > Please consider accelerating the process and go to WGLC much earlier > than October. > > > > > > 2013/5/29 Mike Jones <[email protected]> > >> The -11 drafts of the JSON Object Signing and Encryption >> (JOSE)<http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/jose/>specifications have been >> released that incorporate the changes agreed to at >> the interim working group meeting last month. Most of the changes were to >> the JWS and JWE JSON Serialization representations, enabling more flexible >> treatment of header parameter values. Other changes included removing the >> Encrypted Key value from the JWE integrity calculation, saying more about >> key identification, adding key identification parameters to some of the >> examples, clarifying the use of “kid” values in JWK Sets, enabling X.509 >> key representations in JWKs, recommending protecting JWKs containing >> non-public information by encrypting them with JWE, adding “alg” values >> for RSASSA-PSS, registering additional MIME types, and a number of >> clarifications. A corresponding -08 JSON Web Token (JWT) spec was also >> released that updated the encrypted JWT example value to track the JWE >> change. Hopefully this will be the last breaking change to the encryption >> calculations. >> >> >> >> The specifications are available at: >> >> · http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature-11 >> >> · >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-encryption-11 >> >> · http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-key-11 >> >> · >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-algorithms-11 >> >> · http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-08 >> >> >> >> HTML formatted versions are available at: >> >> · >> http://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature-11.html >> >> · >> http://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-encryption-11.html >> >> · >> http://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-key-11.html >> >> · >> http://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-algorithms-11.html >> >> · >> http://self-issued.info/docs/draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-08.html >> >> >> >> -- Mike >> >> >> >> P.S. This announcement was also posted at >> http://self-issued.info/?p=1031. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 [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
