Subject: [Cose] COSE Draft Charter - 20140415

From: "Kepeng Li" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 10:29:36 +0800

Hello all,

According to the recent discussions, here is the latest charter:
https://github.com/cose-spec/wg-charter/blob/master/draft-charter.md

I also copy the texts below.

Please check the new charter and let us know if it is ready to be submitted
to our ADs. 

Thanks,

Kind Regards
Kepeng
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE)
 <https://github.com/cose-spec/wg-charter/blob/master/draft-charter.md#chart
er-for-working-group> Charter for Working Group
Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR, RFC 7049) is a concise binary
format for the serialization of data structured to an extended version of
the JSON data model. One motivation for CBOR was to make this data model
more amenable to constrained nodes and constrained node networks (RFC 7228).
The JOSE working group recently completed producing representations for
cryptographic keys, message authentication (MACs), encryption, and digital
signatures, using JSON representation. This working group will reuse the
work done by JOSE, adapting it to the capabilities of CBOR. This will rely
on the JOSE registries, which, where this provides additional efficiency,
will be expanded with additional information.
The resulting formats will not be cryptographically convertible from or to
JOSE formats. This lack of a need for bit-for-bit compabitility which will
enable some simplification in the adaptation process.
Criteria that should be considered on making decisions in changing from a
JSON to a CBOR encoding are:
* Keeping the current JOSE paradigms and formatting where feasible.
* 
* Minimizing message size, code size and computational complexity should be
considered (for the constrained environments where we expect to use this).
* 
* Improving security
* 
* Providing new functionality that uses of JOSE did not require, but are
required for the new use cases.

Issues dealing with key management and binding of keys to identities are out
of scope for the working group.
The Working group will coordinate its progress with the ACE, DICE and CORE
working groups to ensure that we are fulfilling the needs of these
constituencies. Other groups may be added to this list as the set of use
cases is expanded.
The WG will have two deliverables:
* a standards-track specification covering the same cryptographic formats
from JOSE, with optimizations for constrained device processing, expressed
in CBOR;
* registration for algorithms (such as AES-CCM-8) that are appropriate for
constrained environments.
The Working Group will use a wiki to track desired use cases for its work,
but does not intend to publish this as an RFC.
 <https://github.com/cose-spec/wg-charter/blob/master/draft-charter.md#miles
tones> Milestones
* April 2015: Submit COSE specification as a WG item
* 
* April 2015: Submit COSE constrained-appropriate algorithms as a WG item
* 
* June 2015: Submit COSE specification to the IESG, for publication as a
Proposed Standard
* 
* July 2015: Submit COSE constrained-appropriate algorithms to the IESG, for
publication as a Proposed Standard

---

From: Derek Atkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 14:21:04 -0400

Hi,

"Kepeng Li" <[email-masked]> writes:

[snip]

I'm fine with the wording of the proposed charter, however...

>  Milestones

Do we really think these are reasonable milestones?  Considering it's
already April 15th, I suspect we wont get the first two items until May.
That will also delay the rest; I'd push the latter two items back a bit
further, maybe August and September.

That also gives us time to talk as a WG in Prague.

-derek
-- 
       Derek Atkins                 617-623-3745
       [email-masked]             www.ihtfp.com
       Computer and Internet Security Consultant

---

From: Kathleen Moriarty <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 15:20:12 -0400

> That also gives us time to talk as a WG in Prague.

I love the ambitious schedule, but agree with Derek.  We have to form the
WG before you can accept the specification as a WG item.  Let's finalize
the charter and I'll work on that approval process.

It would be good for this list to work on the draft so the ambitious
schedule can be met, even with pushing it out a month or two.

Thank you,
Kathleen

> _______________________________________________
> Cose mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
>

-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen

---

From: "Jim Schaad" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 15:56:33 -0700

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cose [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Derek Atkins
> Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 11:21 AM
> To: Kepeng Li
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [Cose] COSE Draft Charter - 20140415
> 
> Hi,
> 
> >   * July 2015: Submit COSE constrained-appropriate algorithms to the
IESG,
> for
already
> April 15th, I suspect we wont get the first two items until May.
further,
> maybe August and September.

Given that we don't have a working group yet, it might be just as easy to
reset the dates in terms of milestones - specifically change April to
working group formation date and set the next milestones to 5 months later.

I could have the basic structure of the algorithm draft out in a very short
amount of time.  The real discussions around that document are which of the
multiple algorithms should be included in it and which are better left to
other groups to define instead.  That is going to be partially based on the
different requirements from the groups that are looking to use the format,
and for many of them I don't know that it is clear to them what algorithms
they really want.

> That also gives us time to talk as a WG in Prague.

I kind of hope that we don't have much if anything to talk about in Prague.
I kind of expect that I will be somewhat busy trying to do other things like
talking to other groups and people who might want to adopt the format into
their products.  

Jim

---

From: Ludwig Seitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 08:59:40 +0200

On 04/15/2015 04:29 AM, Kepeng Li wrote:
> Please check the new charter and let us know if it is ready to be
> submitted to our ADs.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kind Regards
> Kepeng

I'm also fine with the charter, but I second Derek's doubts about the 
Milestone schedule.

Regards,

Ludwig

-- 
Ludwig Seitz, PhD
SICS Swedish ICT AB
Ideon Science Park
Building Beta 2
Scheelevägen 17
SE-223 70 Lund

Phone +46(0)70-349 92 51
http://www.sics.se

---

From: "Kepeng Li" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 09:44:42 +0800

> specifically change April to working group formation date and set the
>next milestones to 5 months later.

Do you mean something like this:

* WG formation date + 1 month: Submit COSE specification as a WG item

* WG formation date + 5 month: Submit COSE constrained-appropriate
algorithms as a WG item

* WG formation date + 7 month: Submit COSE specification to the IESG, for
publication as a Proposed Standard

* WG formation date + 11 month: Submit COSE constrained-appropriate
algorithms to the IESG, for publication as a Proposed Standard

Thanks,

Kind Regards
Kepeng

在 16/4/15 6:56 am， "Jim Schaad" <[email-masked]> 写入:

>> >   * June 2015: Submit COSE specification to the IESG, for publication
>>as
>a
>> >     Proposed Standard
>> >

---

From: "Jim Schaad" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 19:41:47 -0700

> From: Cose [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Kepeng Li
> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 6:45 PM
> To: Jim Schaad
> Cc: [email-masked]

* WG formation date + 1 month: Submit COSE constrained-appropriate
algorithms as a WG item

* WG formation date + 6 month: Submit COSE specification to the IESG, for
publication as a Proposed Standard

* WG formation date + 6 month: Submit COSE constrained-appropriate
algorithms to the IESG, for publication as a Proposed Standard

Corrected to what I intended.

Jim

> >Given that we don't have a working group yet, it might be just as easy
> >to reset the dates in terms of milestones - specifically change April
> >to working group formation date and set the next milestones to 5 months
> >later.
> >
> >
> >I could have the basic structure of the algorithm draft out in a very
> >short amount of time.  The real discussions around that document are
> >which of the multiple algorithms should be included in it and which are
> >better left to other groups to define instead.  That is going to be
> >partially based on the different requirements from the groups that are
> >looking to use the format, and for many of them I don't know that it is
> >clear to them what algorithms they really want.
> >
> >>
> >I kind of expect that I will be somewhat busy trying to do other things
> >like talking to other groups and people who might want to adopt the
> >format into their products.
> >
> >Jim
> >
> >>
> >> -derek
> >> --