Re: [COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08

2021-05-24 Thread Carsten Bormann
removes the option to transfer > additional certificates. > > Cheers, > John > > From: John Mattsson > Date: Thursday, 13 May 2021 at 13:07 > To: cose > Subject: Re: [COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in > draft-ietf-cose-x509-08 > > Hi

Re: [COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08

2021-05-24 Thread John Mattsson
13 May 2021 at 13:07 To: cose Subject: Re: [COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08 Hi, https://github.com/cose-wg/X509/pull/35 There are three remaining discussions related to the PR that has to be concluded before merging the PR. - Two of the discussio

Re: [COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08

2021-05-13 Thread John Mattsson
Hi, https://github.com/cose-wg/X509/pull/35 There are three remaining discussions related to the PR that has to be concluded before merging the PR. - Two of the discussion are more editorial comments from Ben. - The third discussion is in my understanding more high-level and depend on what

Re: [COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08

2021-03-12 Thread Michael Richardson
John Mattsson wrote: > New comment from Laurance on GitHub pointing out that > proof-of-possesion is not enough. I think this point to that COSE > integrity protection of the end-entity certificate needs to be MUST. I think that the example is incorrect. If we have to protect

Re: [COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08

2021-03-12 Thread Laurence Lundblade
> John > > -----Original Message- > From: Carsten Bormann > Date: Wednesday, 10 March 2021 at 21:03 > To: John Mattsson > Cc: cose > Subject: Re: [COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in > draft-ietf-cose-x509-08 > > On 24. Feb 2021,

Re: [COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08

2021-03-11 Thread John Mattsson
se Subject: Re: [COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08 On 24. Feb 2021, at 10:35, John Mattsson wrote: > > - Added media type application/cbor for a COSE_X509 chain. Why is that the right media type? (We have specific ones for everything else,

Re: [COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08

2021-03-10 Thread John Mattsson
#29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08 On 24. Feb 2021, at 10:35, John Mattsson wrote: > > - Added media type application/cbor for a COSE_X509 chain. Why is that the right media type? (We have specific ones for everything else, no?) Grüße, C

Re: [COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08

2021-03-10 Thread Carsten Bormann
On 24. Feb 2021, at 10:35, John Mattsson wrote: > > - Added media type application/cbor for a COSE_X509 chain. Why is that the right media type? (We have specific ones for everything else, no?) Grüße, Carsten ___ COSE mailing list COSE@ietf.org

Re: [COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08

2021-03-10 Thread John Mattsson
-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08 Hi, At the last interim Ben asked me to make a first attempt at summarizing the discussion and conclusions in the issue tracker, the list, and during the interim. I just made a pull request (PR) doing that. https://github.com/cose

[COSE] Pull-request addressing issues #29 #30 #31 #33 in draft-ietf-cose-x509-08

2021-02-24 Thread John Mattsson
Hi, At the last interim Ben asked me to make a first attempt at summarizing the discussion and conclusions in the issue tracker, the list, and during the interim. I just made a pull request (PR) doing that. https://github.com/cose-wg/X509/pull/35 The PR aims to aims to address issues #29 #30