Re: [jose] #68: Section 3 - JSON Web Key (JWK) Format
"jose issue tracker" <trac+jose@trac.tools.ietf.org> Tue, 05 November 2013 02:01 UTC
Return-Path: <trac+jose@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC3FF11E81C6 for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 18:01:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.594
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.594 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.005, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FPd41OzRJx1X for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 18:01:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFF1421E8172 for <jose@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 18:01:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43684 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <trac+jose@trac.tools.ietf.org>) id 1VdVwu-0003t4-PU; Tue, 05 Nov 2013 03:00:56 +0100
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>
X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software
To: draft-ietf-jose-json-web-key@tools.ietf.org, ietf@augustcellars.com
X-Trac-Project: jose
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 02:00:56 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/jose/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jose/trac/ticket/68#comment:1
Message-ID: <076.0e26447c457582664570e3d7f37e9981@trac.tools.ietf.org>
References: <061.1644e694b34ebc855764cf6a1a5e2259@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 68
In-Reply-To: <061.1644e694b34ebc855764cf6a1a5e2259@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: draft-ietf-jose-json-web-key@tools.ietf.org, ietf@augustcellars.com, jose@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+jose@trac.tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Resent-To: mbj@microsoft.com
Resent-Message-Id: <20131105020100.AFF1421E8172@ietfa.amsl.com>
Resent-Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 18:01:00 -0800
Resent-From: trac+jose@trac.tools.ietf.org
Cc: jose@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [jose] #68: Section 3 - JSON Web Key (JWK) Format
X-BeenThere: jose@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 02:01:04 -0000
#68: Section 3 - JSON Web Key (JWK) Format Description changed by ietf@augustcellars.com: Old description: > A. The first two sentences are not readable - and may be somewhat > contradictory. Suggested re-write as > > ""A JSON Web Key (JWK) is a JSON object. > The members of the object represent different properties of the key. > These properties include the value of the key, the usage of the key and > so forth. > This document defines a set of parameters that are not algorithm > specific, and thus common to many keys."" > > B. member names within is ambiguous - does this mean within each > lexicographical scope or completely? > > C. In the sentence Additional members MAY - this may is not a protocol > requirement. > > D. In the sentence - If not understood - please clarify what "they" is > referring to > > E. In paragraph 3 - sentence 2/3 - First you say they may be reused - > then you tell me they must be collision resistant - please clarify this > text > > F. In paragraph 3 - This should be a reference to the registry not point > to the section 7.1 New description: A. The first two sentences are not readable - and may be somewhat contradictory. Suggested re-write as ""A JSON Web Key (JWK) is a JSON object. The members of the object represent different properties of the key. These properties include the value of the key, the usage of the key and so forth. This document defines a set of parameters that are not algorithm specific, and thus common to many keys."" B. member names within is ambiguous - does this mean within each lexicographical scope or completely? * WON'T FIX - since we don't have nesting at this time, the language is not currently ambiguous - it can get fixed when it becomes ambiguous again. C. In the sentence Additional members MAY - this may is not a protocol requirement. D. In the sentence - If not understood - please clarify what "they" is referring to * WON'T FIX - Punt to the RFC Editor E. In paragraph 3 - sentence 2/3 - First you say they may be reused - then you tell me they must be collision resistant - please clarify this text F. In paragraph 3 - This should be a reference to the registry not point to the section 7.1 * WON'T FIX - My personal peeve -- -- -------------------------+------------------------------------------------- Reporter: | Owner: draft-ietf-jose-json-web- ietf@augustcellars.com | key@tools.ietf.org Type: defect | Status: new Priority: Editorial | Milestone: Component: json-web- | Version: key | Resolution: Severity: - | Keywords: | -------------------------+------------------------------------------------- Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jose/trac/ticket/68#comment:1> jose <http://tools.ietf.org/jose/>
- [jose] #68: Section 3 - JSON Web Key (JWK) Format jose issue tracker
- Re: [jose] #68: Section 3 - JSON Web Key (JWK) Fo… jose issue tracker
- Re: [jose] #68: Section 3 - JSON Web Key (JWK) Fo… jose issue tracker