Babis Routis

:+1: Also from me, for this request Given that the issued was opened a couple years ago. I would like to kindly ask if publishing to Maven Central is under...

> @babisRoutis We'd love to do that but have little experience with it. Could you maybe describe what we'd have to do? If it's something we need to do in...

> Hey, @waltkb, thank you for the interest! That would be really nice! I've created a branch [jose](https://github.com/whyoleg/cryptography-kotlin/tree/jose) (from main), and we could start creating PR's there as a start....

> But now, when I was tried to add some of the algorithms, it filled a bit unnatural, as DER/PEM encoding in some cases needs less parameters, then needed for...

> @whyoleg thanks for the summary! > > > Probably in the end it could be just implementation detail, but also could be exposed to end users (TBD). > >...

> It seems that using the `cnf` claim exclusively would be more straightforward and much better for interop. :+1:

> update on SD-JWT VC where [-04 has been published](https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/oauth/siXXtxohrCiBwdIQ5xJMTqIMbeE/) that includes [this change sd-jwt vc 239](https://github.com/oauth-wg/oauth-sd-jwt-vc/pull/239/files) as resolution to this issue: [oauth-wg/oauth-sd-jwt-vc#232](https://github.com/oauth-wg/oauth-sd-jwt-vc/issues/232) Given the above change in SD-JWT-VC, can...

Totally agree.

I believe that @awoie in his initial comment provided the best reason for simplifying VCI by removing CWT proofs: It cannot be used with attestation-based client authentication ( A requirement...

> since POTENTIAL LSP mandated `cwt` proof type, i think it would be wise to wait for their implementation feedback before we make a decision to remove or keep `cwt`...