[jose] Re: Do you need the JWP JSON Serialization?

[Orie Steele <[e-mail]>]

I would expect the COSE expressions of JWP (CWP ?)... to support
unprotected headers.

Whatever serializations are supported, they should have the same
features... if possible.

If the JWP compact serialization supports unprotected headers / multiple
recipients (probably not a thing for JWP, but is a thing for JWE), then I
don't see a lot of value in specifying a JSON serialization as well.

JSON serializations might be better stored in databases, since the base64
encoded components can often be stored as binary instead of text... but
CBOR would be even better.

That said, it would be nice to have only a single serialization for "JSON",
and single serialization for CBOR, and not 2 for JSON and 1 for CBOR.

Regards,

OS


On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 7:26 PM Michael Jones <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Thanks for your view, Bret.  What is your use case?  Specifically, is
> there something you plan to represent as a JWP that you can’t using the
> Compact Serialization?  If so, what?
>
>
>
> Our motivation is to have a single JSON serialization, like JWT does, to
> increase interoperability.
>
>
>
>                                                                 Thanks,
>
>                                                                 -- Mike
>
>
>
> *From:* Bret Jordan <[e-mail]>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 6, 2024 5:14 PM
> *To:* Michael Jones <[e-mail]>
> *Cc:* [e-mail]
> *Subject:* Re: [jose] Do you need the JWP JSON Serialization?
>
>
>
> Yes, to JSON serialization.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Bret
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 5:42 PM Michael Jones <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> I’m writing to ask whether any of you have a use case that requires the
> JSON Web Proof JSON Serialization? Unless concrete reasons are provided to
> keep it, we propose to make the Compact Serialization the only JSON
> Serialization for JWPs.  This is being tracked at
> https://github.com/ietf-wg-jose/json-web-proof/issues/100.
>
>
>
> Responses saying “I don’t need the JSON Serialization” are also welcomed.
>
>
>
> (A CBOR serialization is planned of course – something we hope to create
> before IETF 121 in Dublin, building on the work to use binary fields values
> in computations that we did prior to Vancouver.)
>
>
>
>                                                                 Thanks,
>
>                                                                 -- Mike &
> DW
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jose mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>
> _______________________________________________
> jose mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>


-- 


ORIE STEELE
Chief Technology Officer
www.transmute.industries

<https://transmute.industries>