IETF Logo Mail Archive

[COSE] compressed certificates -- Re: Proposed charter update

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Fri, 25 September 2020 22:21 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 834303A0A2B for <cose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 15:21:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6WYgmjMVm0un for <cose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 15:21:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 671E73A0A20 for <cose@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 15:21:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 221373899E; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 17:59:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id y-ZBpAQjIjMm; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 17:59:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 946543899D; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 17:59:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75680B20; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 18:20:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>, =?utf-8?Q?'G =C3=B6ran_Selander'?= <goran.selander=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, cose@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <015a01d6935d$8519f200$8f4dd600$@augustcellars.com>
References: <AAEFFA7E-B4B5-495E-A578-BDC0383A9A76@ericsson.com> <015a01d6935d$8519f200$8f4dd600$@augustcellars.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 18:20:53 -0400
Message-ID: <12902.1601072453@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cose/XKb3-9lioqre6Z8vkKoP-jgBwmM>
Subject: [COSE] compressed certificates -- Re: Proposed charter update
X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption <cose.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cose>, <mailto:cose-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cose/>
List-Post: <mailto:cose@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cose-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose>, <mailto:cose-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 22:21:10 -0000

Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> wrote:
    > I just made a relatively fast read through on the compressed
    > certificate draft.  If we are looking to do "native CBOR" certificates
    > then I think that we need to be very explicit what it is meant by
    > "native CBOR".  When I hear that term I end up with a number of
    > different things that this could end up being:

    > 1.  A CBOR Encoding for ASN.1.

I'll bet Nico could whip that up from the Heimdal ASN.1 compiler tools.
It's worth investigating what the resulting benefits would be.

    > 2.  A CBOR Encoding for an X.509 certificate replacement.  (CWT?)

Or possibly an EAT, which is really a subset of CWT.
draft-birkholz-core-coid

    > 3.  What is being proposed in the document which amounts to CBOR
    > Compressed X.509 certificate signed in the CBOR format.

No, that's #4 :-)
  0. is CBOR compressed certificates signed in ASN.1 format, because
     the CBOR compression was 100% bit-for-bit reversible.

    > It might be that coining a new term for this might be best because I
    > definitely got a surprise on the definition.

I think that we have use cases for all these.
We probably shouldn't do them all.
It would be very nice if we were able to deploy this incrementally.

I agree that some terms would be helpful.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email