Toerless Eckert <[email protected]> wrote: > So: if we wanted to support the COSE content-type field semantically > correctly, we should ask for another registry entry:
> application/voucher-cbor TBD4
I don't understand what that would be for.
We already are registering application/voucher-cose+cbor in section 13.5.1
We fit voucher-request into the same content.
(that's distinguished by the SID values)
I think you are overthinking this.
And we transport constrained-vouchers with that MIME type over HTTPS between
Registrar and MASA. And we use it in the Accept: header.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
