Re: [jose] #85: Section 7.1.1. Registration Template

"jose issue tracker" <trac+jose@trac.tools.ietf.org> Wed, 02 October 2013 03:52 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: jose issue tracker <trac+jose@trac.tools.ietf.org>
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
To: draft-ietf-jose-json-web-key@tools.ietf.org, ietf@augustcellars.com
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 03:52:38 -0000
Message-ID: <076.4f544612bc3fccf495023d963237c003@trac.tools.ietf.org>
References: <061.5e9b7da58054cecbb15ccaa2c3957429@trac.tools.ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <061.5e9b7da58054cecbb15ccaa2c3957429@trac.tools.ietf.org>
Resent-To: mbj@microsoft.com
Resent-Message-Id: <20131002035243.7E1FA21E825B@ietfa.amsl.com>
Resent-Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 20:52:43 -0700
Resent-From: trac+jose@trac.tools.ietf.org
Cc: jose@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [jose] #85: Section 7.1.1. Registration Template

#85: Section 7.1.1. Registration Template

Description changed by ietf@augustcellars.com:

Old description:

> A. SHOULD NOT is not acceptable in a template.  This needs to be a
> positive statement.  If it is a SHOULD then reasons for exceptions MUST
> be detailed out for the experts and IANA.
>
> B. For the Parameter Information Class - what is the purpose of having
> this field in the registry?  Why is this information defined someplace
> other than the specification?  (Note that if the suggestion to use
> private as a JSON object is accepted then this makes lots of sense.)
>
> C. S/IETF/IESG/ for change controller.
>     The IESG should be for all IESG documents independent of track.
>
> D. There should be a ktyp field in the template so that a mechanical
> check for duplication of entries can be done.

New description:

 A. SHOULD NOT is not acceptable in a template.  This needs to be a
 positive statement.  If it is a SHOULD then reasons for exceptions MUST be
 detailed out for the experts and IANA.

 * FIXED

 B. For the Parameter Information Class - what is the purpose of having
 this field in the registry?  Why is this information defined someplace
 other than the specification?  (Note that if the suggestion to use private
 as a JSON object is accepted then this makes lots of sense.)

 * WON'T FIX

 C. S/IETF/IESG/ for change controller.
     The IESG should be for all IESG documents independent of track.

 * FIXED

 D. There should be a ktyp field in the template so that a mechanical check
 for duplication of entries can be done.

 * Partial fix - need to make the uniqueness language on the name take into
 account the kty value.

--

-- 
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:               |       Owner:  draft-ietf-jose-json-web-
  ietf@augustcellars.com |  key@tools.ietf.org
     Type:  defect       |      Status:  new
 Priority:  major        |   Milestone:
Component:  json-web-    |     Version:
  key                    |  Resolution:
 Severity:  -            |
 Keywords:               |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jose/trac/ticket/85#comment:1>
jose <http://tools.ietf.org/jose/>

[jose] #85: Section 7.1.1. Registration Template jose issue tracker
Re: [jose] #85: Section 7.1.1. Registration Templ… jose issue tracker
Re: [jose] #85: Section 7.1.1. Registration Templ… jose issue tracker