RE: [dss] timestamping profile wd-05

[Trevor Perrin <trevp@trevp.net>]

At 04:13 PM 3/12/2004 -0500, Dimitri Andivahis wrote:
>[...]
>The reason I am not happy with the text below is that
>it makes a blanket recommendation for restricting
>the contents of time-stamping requests to any DSS server
>based on a limitation of the RFC 3161 method.
>If it goes in the draft as is, any time-stamping method
>that promotes using more than one input document in the request
>will have to explain why there are "valid reasons"
>in their context to "ignore" a recommendation that is sanctioned
>by this profile (as per http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2119.html).
>It would be odd if a profile that is a specialization of the timestamping
>profile would be un-doing recommendations of the parent profile.

I don't think it would be odd.  That's what profiles are for.

However, I really intend the SHOULD recommendation to only apply when the 
client is not sending the <SignatureType> optional input.  When the client 
is requesting a particular type of time-stamp, the rules for that type of 
time-stamp apply.

So how about the below text:

OLD:
> > >"The client MUST only send <DocumentHash> input documents.  The
> > client MUST
> > >NOT sent <Document> input documents.
> > >
> > >The client SHOULD only send a single input document, since some types of
> > >time-stamps (e.g. RFC 3161) can only cover one document per time-stamp."

NEW:
The client MUST only send <DocumentHash> input documents.  The client MUST 
NOT send <Document> input documents.

If the client is not sending the <SignatureType> optional input, then the 
client SHOULD only send a single input document, since some types of 
time-stamps (e.g. RFC 3161) can only cover one document per time-stamp.

If the client is sending the <SignatureType> optional input, then the 
client MAY send multiple input documents, if the client knows that the 
specified time-stamp type can handle them.


Trevor