- From: Mountie Lee <mountie@paygate.net>
- Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 10:58:22 +0900
- To: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
- Cc: Richard Barnes <rbarnes@bbn.com>, Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com>, Web Cryptography Working Group <public-webcrypto@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAE-+aYJgxZPN86P8YxEc+qQLQZDhbsLS8+UDQqWC9mLNr6tHEg@mail.gmail.com>
Hi. thanks for reply. I will try to prepare requirements as soon as possible. regards mountie. On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:32 AM, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com> wrote: > If we're agreed on that, then I agree. > > Mountie, > > Would you like to propose a specific set of text to be included, such as: > What operations are supported > What parameters are supported > Exact references to documentation about the implementation > Known answer tests > > And I'll be happy to assign an identifier, even if no one will implement :) > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Richard Barnes <rbarnes@bbn.com> wrote: > > I agree that SEED isn't a silver bullet, but I don't really see the harm > in assigning them an identifier, regardless of browser support. > > > > Identifiers are cheap, and the existence of an identifier for an > algorithm doesn't at all imply that browsers need to support it. > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 2, 2013, at 2:21 PM, Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com> wrote: > > > >> Since https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=478839 in NSS and > Fx 3.5.x, I don't believe we've materially moved the needle on unblocking > the actual use cases where SEED is used. > >> > >> I'm increasingly convinced that SEED alone isn't a silver bullet to > unblocking the use cases in S. Korea, and so I'm not sure that ACTION-64 is > the right one to take up within this WG. > >> > >> On Oct 1, 2013, at 11:55 PM, Mountie Lee wrote: > >> > >>> I don't know actually. > >>> > >>> my question is based on ACTION-64 ( > http://www.w3.org/2012/webcrypto/track/actions/64) > >>> > >>> regards > >>> mountie. > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com> wrote: > >>> Does any user agent actually plan to implement SEED? > >>> > >>> On Sep 30, 2013 11:04 PM, "Mountie Lee" <mountie@paygate.net> wrote: > >>> Hi. Ryan. > >>> > >>> when I see the list of registered algorithms at latest API spec > >>> ( > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcrypto-api/raw-file/tip/spec/Overview.html#algorithms) > >>> > >>> I can not find SEED as algorithm name. > >>> > >>> what is required to add SEED as algorithm name in spec? > >>> > >>> regards > >>> mountie. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Mountie Lee > >>> > >>> PayGate > >>> CTO, CISSP > >>> Tel : +82 2 2140 2700 > >>> E-Mail : mountie@paygate.net > >>> > >>> ======================================= > >>> PayGate Inc. > >>> THE STANDARD FOR ONLINE PAYMENT > >>> for Korea, Japan, China, and the World > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Mountie Lee > >>> > >>> PayGate > >>> CTO, CISSP > >>> Tel : +82 2 2140 2700 > >>> E-Mail : mountie@paygate.net > >>> > >>> ======================================= > >>> PayGate Inc. > >>> THE STANDARD FOR ONLINE PAYMENT > >>> for Korea, Japan, China, and the World > >>> > >>> > >> > > > -- Mountie Lee PayGate CTO, CISSP Tel : +82 2 2140 2700 E-Mail : mountie@paygate.net ======================================= PayGate Inc. THE STANDARD FOR ONLINE PAYMENT for Korea, Japan, China, and the World
Received on Monday, 7 October 2013 01:59:08 UTC