Re: [jose] Document Action: 'Use Cases and Requirements for JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE)' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-jose-use-cases-06.txt)

As stated below - they will be done as part of the AUTH48 state.  Once a
document goes to the RFC Editor, authors do not produce new draft documents
to be processed.

Jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Jones [mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 2:30 PM
> To: Jim Schaad
> Cc: 'jose mailing list'; 'RFC Editor'
> Subject: RE: [jose] Document Action: 'Use Cases and Requirements for JSON
> Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE)' to Informational RFC
(draft-ietf-jose-
> use-cases-06.txt)
> 
> My specific concern was having a window of opportunity to review the
> revised text before it is frozen in stone.  Specifically, I was wondering
> whether Richard had produced the updates addressing the identified issues,
> and whether he could send them to the list.
> 
> 				-- Mike
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Schaad [mailto:ietf@augustcellars.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 2:27 PM
> To: Mike Jones
> Cc: 'jose mailing list'; 'RFC Editor'
> Subject: RE: [jose] Document Action: 'Use Cases and Requirements for JSON
> Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE)' to Informational RFC
(draft-ietf-jose-
> use-cases-06.txt)
> 
> The document is in RFC-EDITOR state.  This means that we have not yet
> reached the AUTH48 state discussed below.
> 
> The document will appear when it appears.  Worrying about things until
this
> is not really a productive use of time.  It is even possible that it will
stick there
> until the rest of the JOSE documents move forward if that is a judgment
call
> somebody makes.  I don't expect that to happen but it is always possible.
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mike Jones [mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 11:55 AM
> > To: Richard Barnes
> > Cc: Sean Turner; jose chair; jose mailing list; RFC Editor
> > Subject: RE: [jose] Document Action: 'Use Cases and Requirements for
> > JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE)' to Informational RFC
> (draft-ietf-jose-
> > use-cases-06.txt)
> >
> > I'd meant to ask about the status of the JOSE Use Cases document
> > during IETF 89 and the JOSE meeting went so quickly and smoothly, it
> > slipped my mind then to ask! :-)
> >
> > Do we have any sense how close we are to having a JOSE Use Cases RFC?
> >
> > Also, have the issues identified in http://www.ietf.org/mail-
> > archive/web/jose/current/msg03817.html been addressed in the current
> > RFC Editor draft?  If so, could someone please point us to it so that
> > the working group can review the changes?
> >
> > 				Thanks,
> > 				-- Mike
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sean Turner [mailto:TurnerS@ieca.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2014 7:34 AM
> > To: Mike Jones
> > Cc: Richard Barnes; jose chair; jose mailing list; RFC Editor
> > Subject: Re: [jose] Document Action: 'Use Cases and Requirements for
> > JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE)' to Informational RFC
> (draft-ietf-jose-
> > use-cases-06.txt)
> >
> > These are pretty minor and can be fixed during AUTH48.  Between the
> > chairs and I we'll remember to get this edited.
> >
> > spt
> >
> > On Jan 15, 2014, at 07:58, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Are the issues identified in http://www.ietf.org/mail-
> > archive/web/jose/current/msg03817.html being addressed as RFC Editor
> > notes?  If so, can you please point the working group to the editing
> > instructions, so they can be reviewed by the working group?
> > >
> > > 				Thanks,
> > > 				-- Mike
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: jose [mailto:jose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of The IESG
> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 9:32 AM
> > > To: IETF-Announce
> > > Cc: jose chair; jose mailing list; RFC Editor
> > > Subject: [jose] Document Action: 'Use Cases and Requirements for
> > > JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE)' to Informational RFC
> > > (draft-ietf-jose-use-cases-06.txt)
> > >
> > > The IESG has approved the following document:
> > > - 'Use Cases and Requirements for JSON Object Signing and Encryption
> > >   (JOSE)'
> > >  (draft-ietf-jose-use-cases-06.txt) as Informational RFC
> > >
> > > This document is the product of the Javascript Object Signing and
> > Encryption Working Group.
> > >
> > > The IESG contact persons are Sean Turner and Stephen Farrell.
> > >
> > > A URL of this Internet Draft is:
> > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-jose-use-cases/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Technical Summary
> > >
> > >   This document defines a set of use cases and requirements
> > >   for a secure object format encoded using JavaScript Object Notation
> > >   (JSON), drawn from a variety of application security mechanisms
> > >   currently in development.
> > >
> > > Working Group Summary
> > >
> > >   The document represents the consuses of the working group.
> > >   The document was not controversial during the working group
> > >   discussions.
> > >
> > > Document Quality
> > >
> > >  The document has not had a large amount of review outside of  the
> > > JOSE working group.  As such it is possible that the group  has
> > > missed or mis-represented the set of use cases that the  JOSE
> > > working group needs to address when generating the  specifications in
> the group.
> > > The OAUTH working group views  are well presented, but it does not
> > > have sufficient apps area review.
> > >
> > > Personnel
> > >
> > >   Document Shepherd is Jim Schaad
> > >   Area Director is Sean Turner
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > jose mailing list
> > > jose@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > jose mailing list
> > > jose@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose