From 9ae38a20e8eb732e996f8cc2a1b052ebcc9b0403 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: ID Bot Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 09:50:39 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Script updating gh-pages from b28ec96. [ci skip] --- draft-ietf-rats-uccs.html | 275 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ draft-ietf-rats-uccs.txt | 296 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- 2 files changed, 411 insertions(+), 160 deletions(-) diff --git a/draft-ietf-rats-uccs.html b/draft-ietf-rats-uccs.html index 4d13f57..47193b4 100644 --- a/draft-ietf-rats-uccs.html +++ b/draft-ietf-rats-uccs.html @@ -17,23 +17,22 @@ " name="description"> - + @@ -1033,11 +1032,11 @@ Internet-Draft Unprotected CWT Claims Sets -March 2024 +July 2024 Birkholz, et al. -Expires 5 September 2024 +Expires 5 January 2025 [Page] @@ -1050,12 +1049,12 @@
draft-ietf-rats-uccs-latest
Published:
- +
Intended Status:
Standards Track
Expires:
-
+
Authors:
@@ -1117,7 +1116,7 @@

time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

- This Internet-Draft will expire on 5 September 2024.

+ This Internet-Draft will expire on 5 January 2025.

@@ -1467,7 +1477,7 @@

session established. In general, when a privacy preserving Secure Channel is employed for conveying a conceptual message the receiver cannot correlate the message with the senders of other received UCCS messages.

An Attester must consider whether any UCCS it returns over a privacy preserving Secure Channel compromises the privacy in unacceptable ways. As -an example, the use of the EAT UEID Claim Section 4.2.1 of [I-D.ietf-rats-eat] in UCCS over a privacy +an example, the use of the EAT UEID Claim Section 4.2.1 of [I-D.ietf-rats-eat] in UCCS over a privacy preserving Secure Channel allows a Verifier to correlate UCCS from a single Attesting Environment across many Secure Channel sessions. This may be acceptable in some use-cases (e.g., if the Attesting Environment is a @@ -1482,41 +1492,218 @@

6. IANA Considerations

-

In the CBOR Tags registry [IANA.cbor-tags] as defined in Section 9.2 of [RFC8949], IANA is requested to allocate the tag in Table 1 from +

+
+

+6.1. CBOR Tag registration +

+

In the CBOR Tags registry [IANA.cbor-tags] as defined in Section 9.2 of [RFC8949], IANA is requested to allocate the tag in Table 1 from the Specification Required space (1+2 size), with the present document -as the specification reference.

+as the specification reference.

- + - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
+ Table 1: Values for Tags -
TagData ItemSemantics
CPA601map (Claims-Set as per Appendix A of [RFCthis])Unprotected CWT Claims Set [RFCthis]
+ + Tag + Data Item + Semantics + + + + + CPA601 + map (Claims-Set as per Appendix A of [RFCthis]) + Unprotected CWT Claims Set [RFCthis] + + +
-

RFC-Editor: This document uses the CPA (code point allocation) +

RFC-Editor: This document uses the CPA (code point allocation) convention described in [I-D.bormann-cbor-draft-numbers]. For each usage of the term "CPA", please remove the prefix "CPA" from the indicated value and replace the residue with the value assigned by IANA; perform an analogous substitution for all other occurrences of the prefix "CPA" in the document. Finally, - please remove this note.

+ please remove this note.

+
+
+
+
+

+6.2. Media-Type application/uccs+cbor Registration +

+

IANA is requested to add the following Media-Type to the "Media Types" +registry [IANA.media-types].

+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+Table 2: +Media Type Registration +
NameTemplateReference
uccs+cborapplication/uccs+cbor + Section 6.2 of RFCthis
+
+
+
Type name:
+
+

application

+
+
+
Subtype name:
+
+

uccs+cbor

+
+
+
Required parameters:
+
+

n/a

+
+
+
Optional parameters:
+
+

n/a

+
+
+
Encoding considerations:
+
+

binary (CBOR data item)

+
+
+
Security considerations:
+
+

Section 7 of RFCthis

+
+
+
Interoperability considerations:
+
+

none

+
+
+
Published specification:
+
+

RFCthis

+
+
+
Applications that use this media type:
+
+

Applications that transfer Unprotected CWT Claims Set(s) (UCCS) over +Secure Channels

+
+
+
Fragment identifier considerations:
+
+

The syntax and semantics of + fragment identifiers is as specified for "application/cbor". (At + publication of this document, there is no fragment identification + syntax defined for "application/cbor".)

+
+
+
Additional information:
+
+
+
Deprecated alias names for this type:
+
+

N/A

+
+
+
Magic number(s):
+
+

N/A

+
+
+
File extension(s):
+
+

.uccs

+
+
+
Macintosh file type code(s):
+
+

N/A

+
+
+
+
+
+
Person and email address to contact for further information:
+
+

RATS WG mailing list (rats@ietf.org)

+
+
+
Intended usage:
+
+

COMMON

+
+
+
Restrictions on usage:
+
+

none

+
+
+
Author/Change controller:
+
+

IETF

+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+6.3. Content-Format registration +

+

IANA is requested to register a Content-Format number in the "CoAP +Content-Formats" subregistry, within the "Constrained RESTful +Environments (CoRE) Parameters" registry [IANA.core-parameters], as +follows:

+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+Table 3: +Content-Format Registration +
Media TypeEncodingIDReference
application/uccs+cbor-TBD601 + Section 6.3 of RFCthis
+
+
+
-
+

7. Security Considerations @@ -1724,7 +1911,15 @@

[I-D.ietf-rats-eat]
-Lundblade, L., Mandyam, G., O'Donoghue, J., and C. Wallace, "The Entity Attestation Token (EAT)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rats-eat-25, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-rats-eat-25>.
+Lundblade, L., Mandyam, G., O'Donoghue, J., and C. Wallace, "The Entity Attestation Token (EAT)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rats-eat-28, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-rats-eat-28>.

+
+
[IANA.core-parameters]
+
+IANA, "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Parameters", <http://www.iana.org/assignments/core-parameters>.
+
+
[IANA.media-types]
+
+IANA, "Media Types", <http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types>.
[NIST-SP800-90Ar1]
@@ -1895,7 +2090,7 @@

Appendix D. EAT

This appendix is informative.

-

The following CDDL adds UCCS-format and UJCS-format tokens to EAT using its predefined extension points (see Section 4.2.18 (submods) of [I-D.ietf-rats-eat]).

+

The following CDDL adds UCCS-format and UJCS-format tokens to EAT using its predefined extension points (see Section 4.2.18 (submods) of [I-D.ietf-rats-eat]).

 $EAT-CBOR-Tagged-Token /= UCCS-Tagged
diff --git a/draft-ietf-rats-uccs.txt b/draft-ietf-rats-uccs.txt
index 744988d..a557b44 100644
--- a/draft-ietf-rats-uccs.txt
+++ b/draft-ietf-rats-uccs.txt
@@ -5,12 +5,12 @@
 RATS Working Group                                           H. Birkholz
 Internet-Draft                                            Fraunhofer SIT
 Intended status: Standards Track                           J. O'Donoghue
-Expires: 5 September 2024                     Qualcomm Technologies Inc.
+Expires: 5 January 2025                       Qualcomm Technologies Inc.
                                                            N. Cam-Winget
                                                            Cisco Systems
                                                               C. Bormann
                                                   Universität Bremen TZI
-                                                            4 March 2024
+                                                             4 July 2024
 
 
                A CBOR Tag for Unprotected CWT Claims Sets
@@ -53,9 +53,9 @@ Status of This Memo
 
 
 
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 1]
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                 [Page 1]
 
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
    Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
    time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
    material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
 
-   This Internet-Draft will expire on 5 September 2024.
+   This Internet-Draft will expire on 5 January 2025.
 
 Copyright Notice
 
@@ -89,31 +89,34 @@ Table of Contents
    5.  Considerations for Using UCCS in Other RATS Contexts  . . . .   7
      5.1.  Delegated Attestation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
      5.2.  Privacy Preservation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
-   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
-   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
-     7.1.  General Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
-     7.2.  AES-CBC_MAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
-     7.3.  AES-GCM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
-     7.4.  AES-CCM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
-     7.5.  ChaCha20 and Poly1305 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
-   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
-     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
-     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
-   Appendix A.  CDDL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
-   Appendix B.  Example  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
-   Appendix C.  JSON Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
-   Appendix D.  EAT  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
-   Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
-   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
-
-
-
-
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 2]
+   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
+     6.1.  CBOR Tag registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
+     6.2.  Media-Type application/uccs+cbor Registration . . . . . .   8
+     6.3.  Content-Format registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
+   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
+     7.1.  General Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
+     7.2.  AES-CBC_MAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
+     7.3.  AES-GCM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
+     7.4.  AES-CCM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
+     7.5.  ChaCha20 and Poly1305 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
+   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
+     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
+     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
+   Appendix A.  CDDL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
+   Appendix B.  Example  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
+   Appendix C.  JSON Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
+   Appendix D.  EAT  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
+
+
+
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                 [Page 2]
 
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
+   Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
+   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
+
 1.  Introduction
 
    A CBOR Web Token (CWT) as specified by [RFC8392] is always wrapped in
@@ -160,16 +163,16 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
    The terms Claim Key, Claim Value, and CWT Claims Set are used as in
    [RFC8392].
 
-   The terms Attester, Attesting Environment, Evidence, Relying Party
-   and Verifier are used as in [RFC9334].
-
 
 
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 3]
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                 [Page 3]
 
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
+   The terms Attester, Attesting Environment, Evidence, Relying Party
+   and Verifier are used as in [RFC9334].
+
    UCCS:  Unprotected CWT Claims Set(s); CBOR map(s) of Claims as
       defined by the CWT Claims Registry that are composed of pairs of
       Claim Keys and Claim Values.
@@ -215,17 +218,17 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
    Environment (TEE, see [RFC9397]) or a Trusted Platform Module (TPM,
    see [TPM2]).  Especially in some resource constrained environments,
    the same process that provides the secure communication transport is
-   also the delegate to compose the Claim to be conveyed.  Whether it is
-   a transfer or transport, a Secure Channel is presumed to be used for
-   conveying such UCCS.  The following sections elaborate on Secure
 
 
 
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 4]
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                 [Page 4]
 
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
+   also the delegate to compose the Claim to be conveyed.  Whether it is
+   a transfer or transport, a Secure Channel is presumed to be used for
+   conveying such UCCS.  The following sections elaborate on Secure
    Channel characteristics in general and further describe RATS usage
    scenarios and corresponding requirements for UCCS deployment.
 
@@ -272,16 +275,16 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
    MUST come with additional instruction leaflets and security
    considerations.
 
-   For the purposes of this section, any RATS role can be the sender or
-   the receiver of the UCCS.
-
 
 
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 5]
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                 [Page 5]
 
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
+   For the purposes of this section, any RATS role can be the sender or
+   the receiver of the UCCS.
+
    Secure Channels can be transient in nature.  For the purposes of this
    specification, the mechanisms used to establish a Secure Channel are
    out of scope.
@@ -330,12 +333,9 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
 
 
 
-
-
-
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 6]
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                 [Page 6]
 
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
    The Secure Channel context does not govern fully formed CWTs in the
@@ -384,17 +384,17 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
    physical sensor in a factory) and unacceptable in others (e.g., if
    the Attesting Environment is a user device belonging to a child).
 
+6.  IANA Considerations
 
 
 
 
-
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 7]
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                 [Page 7]
 
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
-6.  IANA Considerations
+6.1.  CBOR Tag registration
 
    In the CBOR Tags registry [IANA.cbor-tags] as defined in Section 9.2
    of [RFC8949], IANA is requested to allocate the tag in Table 1 from
@@ -419,6 +419,70 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
    // occurrences of the prefix "CPA" in the document.  Finally, please
    // remove this note.
 
+6.2.  Media-Type application/uccs+cbor Registration
+
+   IANA is requested to add the following Media-Type to the "Media
+   Types" registry [IANA.media-types].
+
+      +===========+=======================+========================+
+      | Name      | Template              | Reference              |
+      +===========+=======================+========================+
+      | uccs+cbor | application/uccs+cbor | Section 6.2 of RFCthis |
+      +-----------+-----------------------+------------------------+
+
+                     Table 2: Media Type Registration
+
+   Type name:  application
+   Subtype name:  uccs+cbor
+   Required parameters:  n/a
+   Optional parameters:  n/a
+   Encoding considerations:  binary (CBOR data item)
+   Security considerations:  Section 7 of RFCthis
+   Interoperability considerations:  none
+   Published specification:  RFCthis
+   Applications that use this media type:  Applications that transfer
+      Unprotected CWT Claims Set(s) (UCCS) over Secure Channels
+
+
+
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                 [Page 8]
+
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
+
+
+   Fragment identifier considerations:  The syntax and semantics of
+      fragment identifiers is as specified for "application/cbor".  (At
+      publication of this document, there is no fragment identification
+      syntax defined for "application/cbor".)
+   Additional information:  Deprecated alias names for this type:  N/A
+
+                            Magic number(s):  N/A
+
+                            File extension(s):  .uccs
+
+                            Macintosh file type code(s):  N/A
+   Person and email address to contact for further information:  RATS WG
+      mailing list (rats@ietf.org)
+   Intended usage:  COMMON
+   Restrictions on usage:  none
+   Author/Change controller:  IETF
+
+6.3.  Content-Format registration
+
+   IANA is requested to register a Content-Format number in the "CoAP
+   Content-Formats" subregistry, within the "Constrained RESTful
+   Environments (CoRE) Parameters" registry [IANA.core-parameters], as
+   follows:
+
+        +=======================+==========+========+=============+
+        | Media Type            | Encoding | ID     | Reference   |
+        +=======================+==========+========+=============+
+        | application/uccs+cbor | -        | TBD601 | Section 6.3 |
+        |                       |          |        | of RFCthis  |
+        +-----------------------+----------+--------+-------------+
+
+                    Table 3: Content-Format Registration
+
 7.  Security Considerations
 
    The security considerations of [RFC8949] apply.  The security
@@ -434,22 +498,19 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
    scope where a scope-specific security consideration discussion has
    not been conducted, vetted and approved for that use.  In order to be
    able to use the UCCS CBOR tag in another such scope, the secure
-   channel and/or the application protocol (e.g., TLS and the protocol
-   identified by ALPN) MUST specify the roles of the endpoints in a
-   fashion that the security properties of conveying UCCS via a Secure
-   Channel between the roles are well-defined.
-
-
-
 
 
 
-
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 8]
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                 [Page 9]
 
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
+   channel and/or the application protocol (e.g., TLS and the protocol
+   identified by ALPN) MUST specify the roles of the endpoints in a
+   fashion that the security properties of conveying UCCS via a Secure
+   Channel between the roles are well-defined.
+
 7.1.  General Considerations
 
    Implementations of Secure Channels are often separate from the
@@ -491,21 +552,24 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
    The remaining subsections of this section highlight some aspects of
    specific cryptography choices that are detailed further in [RFC9053].
 
-7.2.  AES-CBC_MAC
 
-   *  A given key should only be used for messages of fixed or known
-      length.
 
-   *  Different keys should be used for authentication and encryption
-      operations.
 
 
 
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024                [Page 9]
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                [Page 10]
 
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
+7.2.  AES-CBC_MAC
+
+   *  A given key should only be used for messages of fixed or known
+      length.
+
+   *  Different keys should be used for authentication and encryption
+      operations.
+
    *  A mechanism to ensure that IV cannot be modified is required.
 
    Section 3.2.1 of [RFC9053] contains a detailed explanation of these
@@ -546,6 +610,14 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
 
 8.  References
 
+
+
+
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                [Page 11]
+
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
+
+
 8.1.  Normative References
 
    [IANA.cbor-tags]
@@ -555,13 +627,6 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
    [IANA.cwt] IANA, "CBOR Web Token (CWT) Claims",
               .
 
-
-
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024               [Page 10]
-
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
-
-
    [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
               Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
               DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
@@ -602,21 +667,28 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
 
 8.2.  Informative References
 
-   [I-D.ietf-rats-eat]
-              Lundblade, L., Mandyam, G., O'Donoghue, J., and C.
-              Wallace, "The Entity Attestation Token (EAT)", Work in
-              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rats-eat-25, 15
-              January 2024, .
 
 
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                [Page 12]
+
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
+   [I-D.ietf-rats-eat]
+              Lundblade, L., Mandyam, G., O'Donoghue, J., and C.
+              Wallace, "The Entity Attestation Token (EAT)", Work in
+              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rats-eat-28, 25 June
+              2024, .
 
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024               [Page 11]
-
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+   [IANA.core-parameters]
+              IANA, "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE)
+              Parameters",
+              .
 
+   [IANA.media-types]
+              IANA, "Media Types",
+              .
 
    [NIST-SP800-90Ar1]
               Barker, E. and J. Kelsey, "Recommendation for Random
@@ -647,6 +719,17 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
               Initial Algorithms", RFC 9053, DOI 10.17487/RFC9053,
               August 2022, .
 
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                [Page 13]
+
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
+
+
    [RFC9334]  Birkholz, H., Thaler, D., Richardson, M., Smith, N., and
               W. Pan, "Remote ATtestation procedureS (RATS)
               Architecture", RFC 9334, DOI 10.17487/RFC9334, January
@@ -661,19 +744,6 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
               “2.0”, Level 00, Revision 01.59 ed., Trusted Computing
               Group", 2019.
 
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024               [Page 12]
-
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
-
-
 Appendix A.  CDDL
 
    The Concise Data Definition Language (CDDL), as defined in [RFC8610]
@@ -711,23 +781,9 @@ Appendix A.  CDDL
 
 
 
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024               [Page 13]
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                [Page 14]
 
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
    UCCS-Untagged = Claims-Set
@@ -781,9 +837,9 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
 
 
 
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024               [Page 14]
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                [Page 15]
 
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
    ; [RFC8747]
@@ -837,9 +893,9 @@ Appendix C.  JSON Support
 
 
 
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024               [Page 15]
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                [Page 16]
 
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
 Appendix D.  EAT
@@ -893,9 +949,9 @@ Authors' Addresses
 
 
 
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024               [Page 16]
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                [Page 17]
 
-Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
+Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets             July 2024
 
 
    Carsten Bormann
@@ -949,4 +1005,4 @@ Internet-Draft         Unprotected CWT Claims Sets            March 2024
 
 
 
-Birkholz, et al.        Expires 5 September 2024               [Page 17]
+Birkholz, et al.         Expires 5 January 2025                [Page 18]