[Rats] Coordination between SEAT and RATS for attested TLS for confidential computing

[Muhammad Usama Sardar <[e-mail]>]

Hi RATS,

As some of you know, SEAT [0] is working on attested TLS. The boundary 
of SEAT with TLS seems to be precisely defined, but I believe the 
boundary between SEAT and RATS would benefit from more explicit definitions.

Some questions came up in SEAT about what belongs in RATS and what 
belongs in SEAT. In particular:

 1. What should be the minimum requirements for the user-defined Claims
    (like REPORTDATA field in Intel TDX) in Evidence?
 2. How should these Claims be verified?

I am particularly interested in Confidential Computing.

After some brainstorming, I have the following idea:

 1. One document describing the above two points in general
 2. One document per vendor describing the profile
      * Intel TDX
      * AMD SEV-SNP
      * Arm CCA

I would appreciate feedback on the following questions:

 1. Do chairs view that within scope of RATS charter?
 2. If yes, then:
     1. Is there already some document on these lines?
     2. Is there already a plan to move some document towards this
        direction?
     3. is there interest in RATS to work on this?

Thank you.

Best regards,

-Usama


[0] https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/seat/about/