This seems good to me. We had planned to request registry entries for JOSE algorithms that match the COSE algorithms for:
- https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-dilithium/ - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-falcon/ - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-sphincs-plus/ Seems like there might be some overlap in objectives, aside from updating test vectors, one of the most recent changes we have made was to update the kty values to "MLWE". ... seems like perhaps we should align to the latest NIST terminology? Naming is hard. If you see anything in the drafts that looks like it might be headed the wrong direction or impact the proposed text above, please let us know. Personally, I support the maintenance extensions, happy to help review documents in support of that mission. OS On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 9:14 AM John Mattsson <john.mattsson= [email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > > > We (the chairs) have discussed with our AD Roman. We forgot to include > basic JOSE maintenance in the charter when the WG got reopened. The > current charter is silent on the topic. It’s definitely an obvious > oversight. We think it is best to do a recharter as soon as possible to > fix this. > > We suggest adding something like the draft text below to the end of the > current > charter. The suggested text borrows a lot from the COSE and IPSECME > charters. The first step is to get consensus in the working group. Please > comment on this thread. > > Cheers, > > John, for the chairs > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > *The JOSE working group will also maintain the JOSE standard and > facilitate* *discussion of* *clarifications, improvements, and extensions > to JWS, JWE, JWA,* *and JWK. The WG will evaluate, and potentially adopt, > documents dealing with algorithms* *that would fit the criteria of being > IETF consensus algorithms.* *Potential candidates would include those > algorithms that have been evaluated by* *the CFRG and algorithms which > have gone through a public review and evaluation* *process such as was > done for the NIST SHA-3 algorithms.* *Potential candidates would not > include national-standards-based algorithms* *that have not gone through > a similar public review process.* > > > > *This group is chartered to work on the following deliverables:* > > > > *- Document registering cryptographic algorithm identifiers that fully > specify the cryptographic operations to be performed.* > > *- Document describing the use of the NIST algorithm ML-KEM in JOSE.* > > *- Document describing the use of the NIST algorithm ML-DSA in JOSE.* > > *- Document describing the use of the NIST algorithm SLH-DSA in JOSE.* > > *- Document describing the use of the NIST algorithm NL-DSA in JOSE.* > > *- One or more documents describing the proper use of algorithms.* *These > algorithms must meet the requirements outlined above.* > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > jose mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose > -- ORIE STEELE Chief Technology Officer www.transmute.industries <https://transmute.industries>
_______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
