[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dss] FW: Here is the TimeStamp scope question to post to the list.
At 06:30 PM 9/16/2003 +0200, Juan Carlos Cruellas wrote: >Think that we do not have control on the number of potential clients of >this server. And perhaps >some of them would request a combination of time-stamps and other things >that none of >the application profiles of the server have.... You assume a smart client. I tend to assume stupid clients - a business will do a careful analysis and will decide what type of signatures it needs for a particular task. Then it will deploy a server to produce that type. But to get concrete, how many choices do you think we need in the core protocol for time-stamping? A) 0 choices = No control - everything implicit B) 2 choices = Timestamp/No Timestamp C) 3 choices = Signature Timestamp / Content Timestamp / No Timestamp D) More choices = RefsTimeStamp, SigAndRefsTimestamp, ArchiveTimestamp, etc... Ed's last proposal was (C). I believe Nick was in favor of (D). I lean towards (A) or (B). Trevor
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]