[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dss] Compound operation Verify & Sign
At 01:49 PM 10/26/2003 -0500, Edward Shallow wrote: >Nick and Co, > > The last suggested position I remember getting consensus on was that the >request for the secondary or ancilliary operation should be expressed in the >"Options" or "ProcessingOptions" structure as it was then called. I agree with you when there's clearly a primary operation, and a secondary one, such as "sign with time-stamp". But in Nick's case, we've gone back and forth over whether the Verify or the Sign is primary. > So in your example below, the principle operation is the "Verify". The >client requestor must express their desire through use of (for example) an >"AddContentTimeStamp" option or something similar. That's one way to do it - another way is to have a hybrid <VerifyAndSign> operation, with a request message similar to <VerifyRequest> (which sends a signature) and a response message similar to <SignResponse> (which returns a signature). I haven't looked into this enough to be able to really defend it, it just feels "righter" to me that trying to shoe-horn this into either the Signing or Verifying protocol. How does this grab you? Trevor
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]