Well, I have been using, but now realize the spec changed or I was confused.
I had been setting "typ" to be either "JWE" or "JWS" depending on the type of token I was creating or parsing as it was easier than looking at "alg" As currently defined, I don't see value in "typ". -- Dick On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Jim Schaad <[email protected]> wrote: > In reading the documents, I am trying to understand the justification for > having the “typ” header parameter in the JOSE documents.**** > > ** ** > > The purpose of the field is to hold the type of the object. In the past, > I believe that values which should now be placed in the cty field (such as > “JWT”) were placed in this field as well. However the parameter is > optional and an implementation cannot rely on its being present. This > means that for all practical purposes all of the code to determine the > value of the type field from the values of the alg and enc fields. If the > field was mandatory then this code would disappear at a fairly small space > cost and I can understand why the parameter would be present.**** > > ** ** > > Can anybody justify why this field should be present in the document – or > should it just disappear?**** > > ** ** > > Jim**** > > ** ** > > _______________________________________________ > jose mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose > > -- -- Dick
_______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
