Authors,
While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary) the
following questions, which are also in the XML file.
1) <!-- [rfced] We have updated the title of the document to expand "EAT"
per Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide"). Please review.
Original:
EAT Media Types
Current:
Entity Attestation Token (EAT) Media Types
-->
2) <!-- [rfced] Abstract and Section 1: Note that we have updated the
expansion of RATS per RFC 9334. In addition, may we rephrase the text as
follows to clarify the object being used in RESTful APIs?
Original:
Payloads used in Remote Attestation Procedures may require an
associated media type for their conveyance, for example when used in
RESTful APIs.
Perhaps:
The payloads used in Remote ATtestation procedureS (RATS) may require
an associated media type for their conveyance, for example, when the
payloads are used in RESTful APIs.
-->
3) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We have updated the title of Section 1.1 to
"Terminology" from "Requirements Language" in order to avoid confusion
regarding the use of "Requirements Language" in RFCs 2119 and 8174 (see
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7322.html#section-4.8.2). Please let us
know any objections.
-->
4) <!-- [rfced] Figure 2: Note that we have changed "Legenda" to "Legend"
for clarity. Legeneda appears in some dictionaries without being defined
as a key or explanation for a map or chart.
-->
5) <!-- [rfced] RFC-to-be 9711 <draft-ietf-rats-eat> seems to double quotes
for Claim names, while this document seems to use <tt>. Should this
document use double quotes to align with RFC 9711?
Example from 9711:
The "eat_profile" claim identifies ...
>From section 3 of this document:
... identifier using the eat_profile claim ...
In addition, please review the use of <tt> to ensure use is as desired
and consistent. The pattern of use is unclear to us. We see the
following instances of <tt>:
<tt>eat_profile</tt> claim
<tt>eat_profile</tt> parameter
<tt>application/eat+cwt</tt>
<tt>parameter-value</tt>
<tt>quoted-string</tt> encoding
<tt>application/eat+jwt; eat_profile="tag:evidence.example,2022"</tt>
<tt>token</tt> encoding
<tt>application/eat+cwt; eat_profile=2.999.1</tt>
<tt>application/eat-ucs+json</tt> and <tt>application/eat-ucs+cbor</tt>
<tt>+cwt</tt> Structured Syntax Suffix
<tt>+cwt</tt>
<tt>application/cwt</tt>
Double quotes are used in the registration templates:
Optional parameters: "eat_profile"
application/eat* (sans <tt> in table)
+cwt (sans <tt> in the IANA template)
-->
6) <!-- [rfced] Note that we have updated the "NOTE" in Figures 3 and 4 to
reflect what appears in Section 7.1.1 in RFC 8792
(https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8792.html#name-header). Are the pound
symbols important (e.g., do they indicate comments)?
Original:
# NOTE: '\' line wrapping per RFC 8792
Updated:
NOTE: '\' line wrapping per RFC 8792
-->
7) <!-- [rfced] We note that RFC 7519 is not cited anywhere in this
document. Please let us know if there is an appropriate place in the text
to reference this RFC. Otherwise, we will remove it from the Normative
References section.
-->
8) <!-- [rfced] We have the following queries regarding abbreviations and
expansions.
a) FYI - We have added expansions for abbreviations upon first use per
Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide"). Please review each expansion
in the document carefully to ensure correctness.
b) FYI - When the abbreviation "EAT" is used in plural form, we have
updated to use "EATs". We note this expansion in particular since there are
multiple occurences that have been updated. Please let us know any objections.
-->
9) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of the
online Style Guide
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/#inclusive_language>
and let us know if any changes are needed. Updates of this nature
typically result in more precise language, which is helpful for readers.
Note that our script did not flag any words in particular, but this should
still be reviewed as a best practice.
-->
Thank you.
RFC Editor
On Apr 21, 2025, at 8:30 PM, rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org wrote:
*****IMPORTANT*****
Updated 2025/04/21
RFC Author(s):
--------------
Instructions for Completing AUTH48
Your document has now entered AUTH48. Once it has been reviewed and
approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC.
If an author is no longer available, there are several remedies
available as listed in the FAQ (https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/).
You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties
(e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing
your approval.
Planning your review
---------------------
Please review the following aspects of your document:
* RFC Editor questions
Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor
that have been included in the XML file as comments marked as
follows:
<!-- [rfced] ... -->
These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email.
* Changes submitted by coauthors
Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your
coauthors. We assume that if you do not speak up that you
agree to changes submitted by your coauthors.
* Content
Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot
change once the RFC is published. Please pay particular attention to:
- IANA considerations updates (if applicable)
- contact information
- references
* Copyright notices and legends
Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in
RFC 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions
(TLP – https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
* Semantic markup
Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements of
content are correctly tagged. For example, ensure that <sourcecode>
and <artwork> are set correctly. See details at
<https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary>.
* Formatted output
Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the
formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is
reasonable. Please note that the TXT will have formatting
limitations compared to the PDF and HTML.
Submitting changes
------------------
To submit changes, please reply to this email using ‘REPLY ALL’ as all
the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The parties
include:
* your coauthors
* rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org (the RPC team)
* other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g.,
IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the
responsible ADs, and the document shepherd).
* auth48archive@rfc-editor.org, which is a new archival mailing list
to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active discussion
list:
* More info:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc
* The archive itself:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/
* Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt out
of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive matter).
If needed, please add a note at the top of the message that you
have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded,
auth48archive@rfc-editor.org will be re-added to the CC list and
its addition will be noted at the top of the message.
You may submit your changes in one of two ways:
An update to the provided XML file
— OR —
An explicit list of changes in this format
Section # (or indicate Global)
OLD:
old text
NEW:
new text
You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an explicit
list of changes, as either form is sufficient.
We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes that seem
beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, deletion of text,
and technical changes. Information about stream managers can be found in
the FAQ. Editorial changes do not require approval from a stream manager.
Approving for publication
--------------------------
To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email stating
that you approve this RFC for publication. Please use ‘REPLY ALL’,
as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval.
Files
-----
The files are available here:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782.xml
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782.html
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782.pdf
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782.txt
Diff file of the text:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782-diff.html
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
Diff of the XML:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9782-xmldiff1.html
Tracking progress
-----------------
The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9782
Please let us know if you have any questions.
Thank you for your cooperation,
RFC Editor
--------------------------------------
RFC 9782 (draft-ietf-rats-eat-media-type-12)
Title : EAT Media Types
Author(s) : L. Lundblade, H. Birkholz, T. Fossati
WG Chair(s) : Ned Smith, Kathleen Moriarty
Area Director(s) : Deb Cooley, Paul Wouters
--
auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org
To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
