Re: Anyone working on 4310-bis?
Andrew Sullivan <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.provreg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 10:32:19AM -0400, James Gould wrote: > still behaves like a replace, which again is backward compatible. The only > difference is that all four elements need to be provided (keyTag, alg, > digestType, digest) with a rem, which I don¹t believe should be a big issue. > Does anyone see an issue with having to specify either the keyTag or all > four elements on a rem? Can you say why you prefer to use all four elements instead of just the digest? The digest actually is unique, so adding the other elements doesn't make it easier, I don't think, does it? A -- Andrew Sullivan [email protected] Shinkuro, Inc. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- List run by majordomo software. For (Un-)subscription and similar details send "help" to [email protected]