In the JWS/JWE drafts the goal was to provide JSON envelopes for base64url encoded blobs.
In most cased we intend for those to be JSON, but nothing prevents this from being used with XML similar to the failed SAML simple sign. With JSON payloads we really wanted to avoid touching the payload. Inserting elements, canonicalization and other things that touch the payload are highly problematic. John B. On 2011-08-03, at 4:50 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 8/3/11 2:49 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> On 8/3/11 2:33 PM, Thomas Hardjono wrote: >> >>> Also, will RFC4627 be "upgraded" to standards track? >> >> There's no real need -- most of the media type registration RFCs are >> informational. However, we might want to look at the entire "stack" of >> JSON-related specs and move them all to standards track (media type, >> schema, etc.). > > Clarification: by "we" I do *not* mean the (presumptive) JOSE WG. > > /psa > _______________________________________________ > woes mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/woes
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ woes mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/woes
