Thank you for reviewing the substantial WGLC feedback, Karen. As you’ve probably seen, Orie and I diligently went through all of it and tried to incorporate resolutions to it in https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-jose-fully-specified-algorithms-03.html. We believe that the specification is much improved for it. As you also probably saw, we tried to respond to all the WGLC threads, saying what we did in -03 as a result of the feedback.
I would be glad to provide a summary of the improvements made in response to the WGLC feedback during our session at IETF 120 in Vancouver. I can do so in ½ hour, although allowing for 45 minutes including discussion time might be preferable, if feasible. Thank you to all who responded for helping us address this important issue. I look forward to us addressing this charter deliverable<https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/jose/about/> in as simple and timely a manner as possible: “Adopt document registering cryptographic algorithm identifiers that fully specify the cryptographic operations to be performed (as proposed standard)” Best wishes, -- Mike From: Karen ODonoghue <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2024 8:36 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [jose] Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-jose-fully-specified-algorithms JOSE working group members, While there is clear consensus that this draft is important, I do think that there are valid arguments that we need to do another pass to address the rather extensive comments before proceeding to make a final determination. The chairs suggest an updated document and a short 2nd WGLC afterward provided that all the issues raised are adequately addressed. I note that a number of emails on the WGLC haven't been responded to yet. Regards, JOSE chairs On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 1:31 AM Karen ODonoghue <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: JOSE working group members, This email initiates a three week working group last call on the following document: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-jose-fully-specified-algorithms/ All open issues have been resolved. Additionally there does not appear to be general support for including fully-specified ECDH algorithms. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jose/ZHDlXENvTwjlWxTVQQ2hkNBX4dw/ Please review the document and post any final comments along with your recommendation on whether or not it is ready to proceed by the Monday 27 May. Thank you, JOSE chairs
_______________________________________________ jose mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
