Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-jose-jws-signing-input-options-08: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-jose-jws-signing-input-options/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The "crit" point raised in the gen-art review and maybe elsewhere is I think correct but I don't think section 6 of -08 is a good resolution of this topic. However, I'll clear if this is the WG consensus but it's hard to know that's the case for text just added yesterday. To resolve this discuss we just need to see what the WG list says about the new text. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - abstract: the description of the update to 7519 is odd. It seems to be saying "Here we define a thing. This specification updates 7519 to say you must not use this thing." but prohibiting is an odd verb to use there. (Since it wasn't previously there to be allowed or not.) - section 6: "It is intended that application profiles specify up front whether" "intended" is very wishy washy and "up front" makes no sense at all. _______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
