[Rats] Re: Orie Steele's Discuss on draft-ietf-rats-msg-wrap-21: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Thomas Fossati <[e-mail]>]

Hi Orie,

On Wed, 3 Dec 2025 at 21:30, Orie <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
> My DISCUSS was just to have the discussion... It seems that +jws is meant to be oblivious to +sd-jwt (for compact only) and application/sd-jwt+json (for json, there is no equivalent suffix).
> Because +jws is a general purpose building block I am picking at this to understand how it may be used to suffix future media types.
>
> option 1: +jws can be used to sign json objects with selective disclosure (compact +jws is equivalent to +sd-jwt when the payload is a json object.).
>
> option 2: +jws can transport signatures over json with selective disclosure as described in ... but only in json serialization, not in compact serialization.
>
> option 3: say nothing.
>
> Unless RATS sees JSON as the most likely payload content type, I would suggest 3.
> If it becomes important for a  suffix for the json expression of an sd-jwt, that's probably better solved by OAuth if at all.
>
> What do you think?

I am for option 3.

It may look like I am taking the easy option (again :-)), but I'm
pretty sure it's also the right option in this case.

Cheers, and thanks for the interesting discussion!