On 12/15/17 09:24, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> Adam Roach <[email protected]> wrote:
>     > among them. I'll note that these techniques relate to MIME types and
>     > related
>     > data (filename extensions). The fact that *this* document doesn't
>     > define a MIME
>     > type for the CMS-signed-JSON variant will make it difficult and/or
>     > awkward for
>     > these future formats to employ these techniques. For example, if I were
> 
> In the first use of this format over HTTPS, which is "BRSKI",
> 
> We register parameters for the application/smime-type.
> Since that we written we changed the "primary" signing type from PKCS7 to
> CMS, so I think that these will become application/cms registrations instead.

After some discussion, Max and I (Kent is on PTO) decided that your way
is best, and provided that Kent has no problem with your suggestion of
application/voucher-cms+json, we will go with that.

https://github.com/anima-wg/voucher/pull/14/commits/683d3c49037dcfe3e65717856eaabb1e213fe4ca

are the changes... does the MIME registration look right?


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

Reply via email to