I appreciate both of you pointing out inconsistencies in the document. The
editors will certainly fix those in the next draft.
Thanks,
-- Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Neil Madden <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2024 11:20 PM
To: Karen ODonoghue <[email protected]>
Cc: JOSE WG <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: [jose] Re: 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-jose-fully-specified-algorithms
(Fully Specified Algorithms)
As myself and Filip Skokan have pointed out, the wording of section 3.1
currently (I believe accidentally) outlaws all of the ECDH-ES encryption
algorithms, and any future KEM-based algorithms. So no, even if you support the
idea, the document is not ready.
— Neil
> On 12 Sep 2024, at 17:48, Karen ODonoghue <[email protected]> wrote:
> JOSE and COSE working group members,
>
> This WGLC is currently scheduled to conclude on 13 September
> (tomorrow). I am not currently comfortable with the number and clarity
> of responses received. Please respond clearly indicating whether or
> not you think this document is ready to proceed (pending the comments
> raised in your response). To give you all a bit more time, I'm
> extending the WGLC one week to next Friday (20 September 2024).
>
> Please take a few minutes and review the updated draft!
>
> Thanks,
> Karen
>
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 11:10 AM Karen ODonoghue <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> JOSE working group members,
>>
>> This email initiates a second working group last call for the Fully
>> Specified Algorithms document:
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdata
>> tracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-ietf-jose-fully-specified-algorithms%2
>> F&data=05%7C02%7C%7Cfd5f3330bd0e4b677dc908dcd3bc2cc0%7C84df9e7fe9f640
>> afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638618052360448442%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb
>> 3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D
>> %7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=MTq3s9c4XSjd%2FY9MX2hh%2FMR8fVFXKdYjXhvvwNM2%2BuE
>> %3D&reserved=0
>>
>> The authors have updated the draft based on WGLC comments and
>> discussions at IETF 120, and the chairs have polled the working group
>> about the readiness for WGLC. Seeing no opposition, we've decided to
>> proceed with a second WGLC.
>>
>> Please review the document in detail and reply to this message
>> (keeping the subject line intact) with your opinion on the readiness
>> of this document for publication and any additional comments that you
>> have.
>>
>> This will be a three week WGLC. Please submit your responses by 13
>> September 2024.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Karen (for the JOSE WG chairs)
>
> _______________________________________________
> jose mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
jose mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
jose mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
