[jose] do we need +jose?

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 09 May 2023 18:50 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 5BC9CC14CE4B; Tue, 9 May 2023 11:50:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.397
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cWxk43JDIx0J; Tue, 9 May 2023 11:50:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CCB0C151B3C; Tue, 9 May 2023 11:50:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 594523898C; Tue, 9 May 2023 15:09:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id iZDMcPo0Dg4N; Tue, 9 May 2023 15:09:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2:40a:34ff:fe10:f571]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE0553898B; Tue, 9 May 2023 15:09:23 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1683659363; bh=VCyLwSj+zNdXusTOZ+/jsC++iAmvGWei4LdqCDPPjJo=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=TN3x6XYNDCdIU3BQTk4d6ez7XH8iJuGtV227X94P6enB5J05fpRQEUH0c0tI5s8mB Q8qC7X4S0/hC43dITMuFG39sq0cz8NxGaIRxnNVYK5tBXIJ+BDz87Fucnkzoy0F8+w cTv8KUkrUIDVA6hg6RJCMuob0di6u487C7zPRbEIB7EqHnYK3NHipriY4d8YgBmx+9 B0TTy8FAWrBYmJ8ZcRq7RjA03CmbEC6AaDZwL+QVbsHCtalsRqzl62uD3dkijW3lRa So7X0pzTKPJDeVNTA9obOHj0hqxNQemgjmKV1kvjqM0UNohfPP5Fw59uzu6BUpTv3B 5qvw2o65rEjQw==
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B9D121; Tue, 9 May 2023 14:50:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "media-types@ietf.org" <media-types@ietf.org>, anima@ietf.org, jose@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <16283.1682887399@localhost>
References: <16284.1680886223@localhost> <E5148BFA-C50F-4EE1-B7ED-1D8A9EA15C43@intel.com> <DS7PR21MB3406D6E2E9315926EE7E80028E969@DS7PR21MB3406.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <32345.1680916659@localhost> <BY5PR01MB59558857C66E30DCADEDE64AA39E9@BY5PR01MB5955.prod.exchangelabs.com> <16283.1682887399@localhost>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 27.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 09 May 2023 14:50:40 -0400
Message-ID: <14942.1683658240@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jose/scq0fNN4BNitjUhwDRl0kf1l9V4>
Subject: [jose] do we need +jose?
X-BeenThere: jose@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 09 May 2023 18:50:56 -0000

Hi, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-anima-jws-voucher/
is in WGLC, and
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm/ depends upon it.

In anima-jws-voucher, we defined:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-anima-jws-voucher-06.html#name-application-voucher-jwsjson

        Type name:  application
        Subtype name:  voucher-jws+json

which is in alignment with https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8366.html#section-8.3
where we defined:
      Type name:  application
      Subtype name:  voucher-cms+json

probably this was a mistake!  (JSON in a CMS envelope)

I think, based upon discussion about +cose and our other documents, that we
should really be doing:
       application/voucher+jws

While jwt is given as a structured suffix in the IANA registry, jws is not.
I'm not entirely sure if this matters... we are dealing with JWS, not
tokens...

Please advise.  While we have lots of running code (since 2018) for voucher-jws, it's a
change we could probably make via Postel Principal.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide