CBOR Web Token (CWT) Claims in COSE Headers
draft-ietf-cose-cwt-claims-in-headers-10
Yes
(Paul Wouters)
No Objection
Jim Guichard
(Andrew Alston)
(Erik Kline)
(John Scudder)
(Martin Duke)
(Robert Wilton)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.
Éric Vyncke
No Objection
Comment
(2023-11-27 for -09)
Sent
# Éric Vyncke, INT AD, comments for draft-ietf-cose-cwt-claims-in-headers-09 Thank you for the work put into this document. Please find below one non-blocking COMMENT points. Special thanks to Orie Steele for the shepherd's detailed write-up including the WG consensus *but it lacks* the justification of the intended status. Other thanks to Hannes Tschofenig, the IoT directorate reviewer (at my request), please consider this int-dir review: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/review-ietf-cose-cwt-claims-in-headers-07-iotdir-telechat-tschofenig-2023-10-31/ (and I have read the email discussions with the authors, thanks to all) I hope that this review helps to improve the document, Regards, -éric # COMMENTS (non-blocking) ## Section 3 Is there a reason for using a non-normative "should" in `applications and protocols using them *should* ensure that these COSE objects are only made visible` ?
Jim Guichard
No Objection
Roman Danyliw
No Objection
Comment
(2023-11-16 for -09)
Not sent
Thank you to Peter Yee for the SECDIR Review. Thank you to Hannes Tschofenig for the security-focused IOTDIR review, and to the WG for discussing and resolving this feedback.
Paul Wouters Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -07)
Unknown
Andrew Alston Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Not sent
Erik Kline Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -09)
Not sent
Francesca Palombini Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2023-11-29)
Not sent
Thank you for the work on this document. Many thanks to Claudio Allocchio for his ART ART review: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/art/kuLLKsPo04s22kyXIIV7AsKkgZM/, and to Carsten Bormann for his review and contribution to the text, following his review as IANA Designated Expert of the COSE Header Parameters registry.
John Scudder Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Not sent
Martin Duke Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -09)
Not sent
Murray Kucherawy Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2023-11-30)
Sent
It may be that I'm unfamiliar with this aspect of COSE, but I note that Section 2 says: "The following is a non-normative description for the value type of the CWT claim header parameter using CDDL [RFC8610]." It's curious to have a Standards Track document with only a non-normative description of the thing it purports to standardize.
Robert Wilton Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -09)
Not sent
Warren Kumari Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2023-11-29)
Sent
Thank you for writing this document, and also to Gyan Mishra for the OpsDir review (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/review-ietf-cose-cwt-claims-in-headers-07-opsdir-lc-mishra-2023-11-04/)
Zaheduzzaman Sarker Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2023-11-27 for -09)
Not sent
Thanks for working on this specification. No objection from transport point of view, however, I noticed the IANA is not OK at the time I was reviewing but the AD has assured the issues has been resolved, that means the IANA review is pending.