RE: [xri] Datetime for ds:Signature

[Sakimura Nat <n-sakimura@nri.co.jp>]

I am fine with the creation date of XRD itself.

=nat

________________________________________
差出人: Scott Cantor [cantor.2@osu.edu]
送信日時: 2009年8月12日 4:48
宛先: 'John Bradley'; 'Breno de Medeiros'
CC: 'RL 'Bob' Morgan'; 'XRI TC'
件名: RE: [xri] Datetime for ds:Signature

John Bradley wrote on 2009-08-11:
> If the new parts of ds:sig that Scott mentioned are backwards
> compatible, that may not be too bad.

I think they're just extensions in the Signature syntax somewhere, but I'm
not terribly familiar with them. They're also not formally done, it's just a
working draft.

> Other than perhaps for generational control what is the signing date
> good for?

Timestamps are normally big for bounding replay detection, and I'm not aware
of any such semantic here. An XRD is a document, not a protocol message.

> If it is to know what version of a XRD is the most current, that may
> be a good reason but shouldn't be part of the signature itself.

Yeah, I was going to say that if you add anything, it ought to be about the
XRD itself, not the signature.

-- Scott



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php