Re: [jose] Richard Barnes' Discuss on draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature-33: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

"Jim Schaad" <ietf@augustcellars.com> Mon, 06 October 2014 14:28 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@augustcellars.com>
X-Original-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E06971A6F2F; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 07:28:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
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 EQhYbpAONC1x; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 07:28:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp3.pacifier.net (smtp3.pacifier.net [64.255.237.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65CA81A0300; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 07:28:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Philemon (winery.augustcellars.com [206.212.239.129]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp3.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5560138F0E; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 07:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Jim Schaad" <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: "'Mike Jones'" <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>, "'Richard Barnes'" <rlb@ipv.sx>, "'The IESG'" <iesg@ietf.org>
References: <20141002042150.11117.29199.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739439BAF0C55@TK5EX14MBXC286.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739439BAF0C55@TK5EX14MBXC286.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 07:26:01 -0700
Message-ID: <00a801cfe171$75009440$5f01bcc0$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQGjQ12FeR3xatkx2kc1agM8tSjaEwGXDnIknG+jfsA=
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jose/5zsoXSdm5AEW-gBO9lHOV6-3usY
Cc: jose-chairs@tools.ietf.org, jose@ietf.org, draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [jose] Richard Barnes' Discuss on draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature-33: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: jose@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Javascript Object Signing and Encryption <jose.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jose>, <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/jose/>
List-Post: <mailto:jose@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose>, <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 14:28:36 -0000


> -----Original Message-----
> From: jose [mailto:jose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
> Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 12:54 AM
> To: Richard Barnes; The IESG
> Cc: jose-chairs@tools.ietf.org; jose@ietf.org; draft-ietf-jose-json-web-
> signature@tools.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [jose] Richard Barnes' Discuss on draft-ietf-jose-json-web-
> signature-33: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
> 
> Thanks for your review, Richard.  I'm repeating my previous responses from
my
> Thursday reply, but this time using ">" quoting rather than colors, for
better
> readability by people not using HTML-enabled mail readers...
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: jose [mailto:jose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Richard Barnes
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 9:22 PM
> > To: The IESG
> > Cc: jose-chairs@tools.ietf.org; jose@ietf.org;
> > draft-ietf-jose-json-web- signature@tools.ietf.org
> > Subject: [jose] Richard Barnes' Discuss on
draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature-
> 33:
> > (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
> >
> > Richard Barnes has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature-33: Discuss
> >
> > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut
> > this introductory paragraph, however.)
> >
> >
> > Please refer to
> > http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> >
> >
> > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature/
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > COMMENT:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Appendix A.5.
> > I would prefer if this example could be removed.  JWT is the only use
> > case for Unsecured JWS right now, and there's already an example in that
> document.
> 
> Mike> Given that it's important that implementers using them understand
> Unsecured JWSs, there is motivation to retain the example.  I'd be
interested in
> what others in the working group think, given that there was substantial
> support for retaining this functionality when its removal was proposed.
> 

I have no problems with there being a reference to the JWT document for the
example.

> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > jose mailing list
> > jose@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
> 
> 				Thanks again!
> 				-- Mike
> 
> _______________________________________________
> jose mailing list
> jose@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose