(That does appear to be a typo. The RFC should be 7512.) On Sat, Jul 1, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Nathaniel McCallum <[email protected]> wrote: > Section 3 states: > > 'The "p11" property MUST contain a valid PKCS #11 URI [RFC7517] that > points to a private key object (that is, type=private).' > > As I understand this sentence, the "p11" URI should be validated > according to RFC 7517 with the additional constraint that it must have > type=private. > > On Sat, Jul 1, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Vladimir Dzhuvinov > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Looks good! >> >> +1 to have examples included. >> >> Question: When I parse a JWK with a "p11" parameter, should the p11 URI >> syntax be validated? What constitutes a syntactically valid p11 URI? >> >> >> >> On 30/06/17 23:33, Nathaniel McCallum wrote: >>> I have prepared an initial stab at a draft for offloading JWK private >>> key data to PKCS #11. >>> >>> You can find the document here: >>> https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-mccallum-jose-pkcs11-jwk-00.txt >>> >>> Thanks for your consideration! >> >>
_______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
