[Feature Request / Contribution Proposal] working with internet drafts

[beltram]

Hi, and first of all thanks for the crate, it great, love it.

When working with internet drafts there are very often a lot of pending/requested IANA codepoints that are not within the private range and hence cannot be used within the ClaimSetBuilder which is a very convenient way to build a Cose object.

One have to resort to do the CBOR serialization by hand on the side to bypass this line.

My proposal is to add another variants like such:

pub enum RegisteredLabelWithPrivate<T: EnumI64 + WithPrivateRange> {
    PrivateUse(i64),
    InternetDraft(T),
    Assigned(T),
    Text(String),
}

#[derive(Clone, Debug, Eq, PartialEq)]
pub enum RegisteredLabel<T: EnumI64> {
    InternetDraft(T),
    Assigned(T),
    Text(String),
}

And an associated ClaimSetBuilder::internet_draft_claim that would let pass arbitrary labels.

What do you think ?

[daviddrysdale]

Which draft IANA codepoints do you need?

If the draft is reasonably stable it might be easiest just to update the enum values to include the draft values, albeit with a risk that a future change in the value would necessitate a breaking change to the crate. For example, we're likely to add (0dd34d7) the draft values for ML-DSA.

The other alternative is to change the RegisteredLabel types as you suggest. I had a go in #114, and it does result in a fair amount of non-back-compatible change.

[beltram]

Hi @daviddrysdale thanks for having a look.

I have 2 drafts on top of my mind for which I required this:

• StatusList, pretty mature AFAIK. Just 1 claim.
• OIDC claims, WGLC should happen fairly soon as well. 19 claims this time 😅

[daviddrysdale]

• StatusList, pretty mature AFAIK. Just 1 claim.

Looks like there's 3 now?

• OIDC claims, WGLC should happen fairly soon as well. 19 claims this time 😅

The datatracker for that one still seems early/unstable – IESG state is just "I-D Exists"?

[beltram]

• StatusList, pretty mature AFAIK. Just 1 claim.

Looks like there's 3 now?

Yes right, 3 indeed.

• OIDC claims, WGLC should happen fairly soon as well. 19 claims this time 😅

The datatracker for that one still seems early/unstable – IESG state is just "I-D Exists"?

This one is mine, I can assure you WGLC is close ;)

Anyway, my issue is more about the next time I'll be implementing a draft, the issue will still be there. If adding an Unassigned variant and merging that in the next major release of the crate could be done that would be awesome 😁