Add CoSERV API implementation

[thomas-fossati]

This PR introduces coserv, a new service endpoint that implements the CoSERV API described in draft-ietf-rats-coserv-02.

[setrofim]

Some minor nits, otherwise LGTM!

[paulhowardarm]

LGTM - great to see this stuff hitting the mainline.

[yogeshbdeshpande]

I am reviewing it now!

[yogeshbdeshpande]

@thomas-fossati : Where is the README.md that defines:

This is a CoSERV Implementation as per the Draft: XYZ
This is applicable to fetch Endorsements in a specific format as defined in the draft.

[yogeshbdeshpande]

@thomas-fossati : Where is the README.md that defines:

This is a CoSERV Implementation as per the Draft: XYZ This is applicable to fetch Endorsements in a specific format as defined in the draft.

This also needs to explain the scope, that is

• Currently Veraison tooling is used to build a Verification Service
• With these changes, one can build an Endorsement Distribution Service using Veraison tooling .?
• The format of returned response follows the format given in the draft

[thomas-fossati]

@thomas-fossati : Where is the README.md that defines:

This is a CoSERV Implementation as per the Draft: XYZ This is applicable to fetch Endorsements in a specific format as defined in the draft.

That text is in the veraison/corim repo.

What the coserv service implements is the HTTP API bindings, which we could add to the coserv/api folder.

[yogeshbdeshpande]

@thomas-fossati I see a lot of new .cbor files in the PR, under scheme/psa-iot/test/corim and similarly in other schemes, like psa-iot

However I do not see any src/ folder for this, am I missing something, OR there is no change?

[yogeshbdeshpande]

There are few comments, please track it via github issues, I have completed the review!

Un-blocking it, as fundamentally the code complies with the Coserv standard

[yogeshbdeshpande]

Approval subject to all Pending comments been resolved!

[thomas-fossati]

@thomas-fossati I see a lot of new .cbor files in the PR, under scheme/psa-iot/test/corim and similarly in other schemes, like psa-iot

However I do not see any src/ folder for this, am I missing something, OR there is no change?

There is no change in the CoRIM JSON templates. Only their serialisations (i.e., the CBOR files) have been updated to match CoRIM.

[yogeshbdeshpande]

@thomas-fossati I see a lot of new .cbor files in the PR, under scheme/psa-iot/test/corim and similarly in other schemes, like psa-iot
However I do not see any src/ folder for this, am I missing something, OR there is no change?

There is no change in the CoRIM JSON templates. Only their serialisations (i.e., the CBOR files) have been updated to match CoRIM.

ok, so I assume, it is due to new revision of CoRIM that is been applied. ..?
However, why did the CBOR changed, unless anything is changed, I am confused.

[thomas-fossati]

@thomas-fossati I see a lot of new .cbor files in the PR, under scheme/psa-iot/test/corim and similarly in other schemes, like psa-iot
However I do not see any src/ folder for this, am I missing something, OR there is no change?

There is no change in the CoRIM JSON templates. Only their serialisations (i.e., the CBOR files) have been updated to match CoRIM.

ok, so I assume, it is due to new revision of CoRIM that is been applied. ..?

yes, exactly. The “new” serialisation (I believe it should -07, or around that time) removes the outer tags.

[yogeshbdeshpande]

@thomas-fossati I see a lot of new .cbor files in the PR, under scheme/psa-iot/test/corim and similarly in other schemes, like psa-iot
However I do not see any src/ folder for this, am I missing something, OR there is no change?

There is no change in the CoRIM JSON templates. Only their serialisations (i.e., the CBOR files) have been updated to match CoRIM.

ok, so I assume, it is due to new revision of CoRIM that is been applied. ..?

yes, exactly. The “new” serialisation (I believe it should -07, or around that time) removes the outer tags.

ok, thanks, please mark the comment as resolved!

[thomas-fossati]

Approval subject to all Pending comments been resolved!

Thanks for the review! I have addressed all your comments and raised a new issue in the veraison/docs repo to deal with the documentation.

[yogeshbdeshpande]

Approval subject to all Pending comments been resolved!

Thanks for the review! I have addressed all your comments and raised a new issue in the veraison/docs repo to deal with the documentation.

Yes, it is important that the main page in Veraison README also reflects the changes, which is also lacking at the moment

[thomas-fossati]

Approval subject to all Pending comments been resolved!

Thanks for the review! I have addressed all your comments and raised a new issue in the veraison/docs repo to deal with the documentation.

Yes, it is important that the main page in Veraison README also reflects the changes, which is also lacking at the moment

Feel free to extend veraison/docs#71 with any other related documentation task.