Re: [core] AD review of draft-ietf-core-object-security-08

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

On Feb 17, 2018, at 16:27, Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 3) In Section 9: Does "osc" target attribute need to be registered with
> IANA?

Some more details about this one:

RFC 5988 decided not to create a registry for link target attributes, and its replacement, RFC 8288, sustained this decision.

RFC 6690 went ahead and defined two sub-registries for *values* of the link target attributes “rt” and “if”.  Still, the target attribute names themselves are registered nowhere.

A 6690bis effort may very well want to create a registry here, now that RFC 8288 says about Target Attributes (Section 2.2):

   They can be defined both by individual link relation types and by
   link serialisations.

   This specification does not attempt to coordinate the name of target
   attributes, their cardinality, or use.  Those creating and
   maintaining serialisations SHOULD coordinate their target attributes
   to avoid conflicts in semantics or syntax and MAY define their own
   registries of target attributes.

So, in addition to individual link relation types, RFC6690 or a successor specification, as a serialization of Web Links, is the place where such a registry could be defined.

Until that happens, OSCORE is exactly right in proceeding in the same way RFC 7641 (Observe) did for “obs”.

Grüße, Carsten