Nonsense: corim = tagged extensible type choice of tags #333
Comments
Tagged type choices are not typical. I would go so far as to drop the 500 tag as the entrypoint to CoRIM altogether. NVIDIA is creating CoRIMs this way, but they are using a different content-type in the protected header. I think we can drop it in an follow-up. This patch drops * the need to tag the type choice * the extensibility of concise-rim-type-choice, since extensibility is governed by a profile, and the profile is not known at this point in parsing. * the need to tag the signed corim, since it is a COSE-sign1 with an unambigiuous content-type, and COSE-sign1 already has its own tag. Addresses Issue ietf-rats-wg#333, but 500 removal is TBD. Signed-off-by: Dionna Glaze <dionnaglaze@google.com>
Tagged type choices are not typical. I would go so far as to drop the 500 tag as the entrypoint to CoRIM altogether. NVIDIA is creating CoRIMs this way, but they are using a different content-type in the protected header. I think we can drop it in an follow-up. This patch drops * the need to tag the type choice * the extensibility of concise-rim-type-choice, since extensibility is governed by a profile, and the profile is not known at this point in parsing. * the need to tag the signed corim, since it is a COSE-sign1 with an unambigiuous content-type, and COSE-sign1 already has its own tag. Addresses Issue ietf-rats-wg#333, but 500 and 502 removal is TBD. Signed-off-by: Dionna Glaze <dionnaglaze@google.com>
Tagged type choices are not typical. I would go so far as to drop the 500 tag as the entrypoint to CoRIM altogether. NVIDIA is creating CoRIMs this way, but they are using a different content-type in the protected header. I think we can drop it in an follow-up. This patch drops * the need to tag the type choice * the extensibility of concise-rim-type-choice, since extensibility is governed by a profile, and the profile is not known at this point in parsing. * the need to tag the signed corim, since it is a COSE-sign1 with an unambigiuous content-type, and COSE-sign1 already has its own tag. Addresses Issue ietf-rats-wg#333, but 500 and 502 removal is TBD. Signed-off-by: Dionna Glaze <dionnaglaze@google.com>
Tagged type choices are not typical. I would go so far as to drop the 500 tag as the entrypoint to CoRIM altogether. NVIDIA is creating CoRIMs this way, but they are using a different content-type in the protected header. I think we can drop it in an follow-up. This patch drops * the need to tag the type choice * the extensibility of concise-rim-type-choice, since extensibility is governed by a profile, and the profile is not known at this point in parsing. * the need to tag the signed corim, since it is a COSE-sign1 with an unambigiuous content-type, and COSE-sign1 already has its own tag. Addresses Issue ietf-rats-wg#333, but 500 and 502 removal is TBD. Signed-off-by: Dionna Glaze <dionnaglaze@google.com>
Tagged type choices are not typical. I would go so far as to drop the 500 tag as the entrypoint to CoRIM altogether. NVIDIA is creating CoRIMs this way, but they are using a different content-type in the protected header. I think we can drop it in an follow-up. This patch drops * the need to tag the type choice * the extensibility of concise-rim-type-choice, since extensibility is governed by a profile, and the profile is not known at this point in parsing. * the need to tag the signed corim, since it is a COSE-sign1 with an unambigiuous content-type, and COSE-sign1 already has its own tag. Addresses Issue ietf-rats-wg#333, but 500 and 502 removal is TBD. Signed-off-by: Dionna Glaze <dionnaglaze@google.com>
Indeed, that
The two-level tagging system effectively smells like overengineering. I don't recall why we originally decided to use this tagging scheme. While I am not opposed to dropping it, this could produce wire-image incompatibility with the TCG's spec, which we agreed must be avoided. |
|
TCG Endorsement spec defines: The TCG is doing errata for this spec. Maybe it makes sense to influence this? |
Then I'd do: which uses 501 for the unprotected and 18 for the sign1-protected |
Which working group? (NOTE by thofos: I hit "edit" instead of "quote reply", apologies!) |
Should be DICE. |
The TCG spec doesn't define It would be an extension to add: |
Tagged type choices are not typical. I would go so far as to drop the 500 tag as the entrypoint to CoRIM altogether. NVIDIA is creating CoRIMs this way, but they are using a different content-type in the protected header. I think we can drop it in an follow-up. This patch drops the need to tag the type choice the extensibility of concise-rim-type-choice, since extensibility is governed by a profile, and the profile is not known at this point in parsing. the need to tag the signed corim, since it is a COSE-sign1 with an unambigiuous content-type, and COSE-sign1 already has its own tag. Addresses Issue ietf-rats-wg#333, but 500 removal is TBD.
We need to remove the extensibility of $concise-rim-type-choice since extensibility is driven by profile, but profile isn't known at this point.
We also don't need to tag the type choice. Let's release the 500 tag?
corim = concise-rim-type-choiceThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: