On May 11, 2022, at 6:45 AM, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef <rifaat.s.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
However, a named information is meant to refer to a specific resource with a specific series of bytes. This ni-scheme URI would refer only to the resource that is that specific canonicalized JWK, with certain information stripped. In the semantics of a JWK thumbprint however, the hash refers to an infinite set of documents that might have different JSON serialization order, whitespace, and/or additional optional JWK fields (including potentially the private key information.) The JWK thumbprint is meant to serve as a common identifying value by all parties to a particular logical key. JWK Thumbprint URI simply provide a common scheme for expressing that identifier as a URI. So, the resolving a named information URI is defined to give you a particular binary entity representation, while resolving a thumbprint will give you one of possibly many object representations that share certain cryptographic properties. Thus I don’t feel it is appropriate to use the same URI scheme to represent both, even though they are potentially isomorphic data forms - we would be using ni-scheme URI as a hash value container rather than for the defined named information semantics. -DW |
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
