IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [stir] JWT/JSON (was - Re: Review of: draft-ietf-stir-passport-05)

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Tue, 23 August 2016 15:30 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: stir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: stir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A28B612D1D5 for <stir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 08:30:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=dcrocker.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3oovxhn60BiE for <stir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 08:30:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (unknown [72.52.113.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4A2212D98B for <stir@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 08:09:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.8.128]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id u7NF9Vrw011133 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 23 Aug 2016 08:09:31 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dcrocker.net; s=default; t=1471964971; bh=F+b3UAQsNrbfwEo/ZANg5V4IONfD8j7ZQefz7nK+zNo=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:Reply-To:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=AYJ28l4HWzfrVN7LL8iYfCCG2iI/plTg4cl5i4JOjM09IlwccDyygKHLNmxaP7FYP 6+OwF64SIbckekpLZhWuwwJiKW4+pqUTcUB2bOxrwXtYHOJAl/YIi27V01uLM0tC9O nAHS6OmdcYkwORA7M7aLqP4lyxWVF4UxYYz3GM38=
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
References: <07e0eb16-6758-cdf1-c571-1f1ed768e741@dcrocker.net> <D3C152B2.1A69BA%jon.peterson@neustar.biz> <b096b541-c8af-9617-c9d7-5a1beb5230e8@dcrocker.net> <D3C16040.1A6A09%jon.peterson@neustar.biz> <d66d91f0-9ea2-6295-e749-e48ea37b4892@dcrocker.net> <cfd714ce-6145-1b60-aca2-ae702a8c133d@dcrocker.net> <CABcZeBNQgsjDOrW2k4WOucTVXSMHjEUjKgGkhYT119Z3yoUv1g@mail.gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B4BC29AD9@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <72ca2036-610e-2226-ed4f-34efbf0e9552@dcrocker.net> <D3E21244.D708%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <31ee21c4-ac59-2dec-3ce2-82ae650ea7c8@dcrocker.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 08:08:58 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <D3E21244.D708%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/stir/lxoWJre5xvzDoYsuOR2i75cB2Ss>
Cc: IETF STIR Mail List <stir@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [stir] JWT/JSON (was - Re: Review of: draft-ietf-stir-passport-05)
X-BeenThere: stir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited <stir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/stir>, <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/stir/>
List-Post: <mailto:stir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir>, <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 15:30:36 -0000

On 8/23/2016 4:58 AM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
> The idea (afaik) is
> to split the encoded string into different pieces, and place those in
> different SIP header field/parameters. But, HOW that split is done, and
> how the string is re-generated on the receiving side, must be clarified.


The need for this additional packaging is a basic specification 
requirement.  (Again, I don't understanding submitting a document for 
last call that is missing basic specification details.)

I also don't understand the need for breaking the json result into 
multiple SIP header fields.

Why isn't it just stuffed into a single header field, like 
STIR-Signature: or the like?

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email