Re: Anyone working on 4310-bis?
Howard Eland <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.provreg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
This is what I was saying. The digest is unique (specially when we're talking across only the same keytag), so the rest of the information is superfluous. -Howard On Oct 29, 2009, at 10:32 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > 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] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- List run by majordomo software. For (Un-)subscription and similar details send "help" to [email protected]