- From: Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2022 17:01:29 +0200
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 02:25:32PM +0000, Justin Richer wrote: > > It could, but I don’t think it’s worth delaying signatures over. There > are two timestamp fields (created and expires) with clear semantics, - If signature is created during (positive) leap second, then the previous second is written as creation time[1], right? - The expires is exclusive endpoint[2] (e.g., expiry at 2400Z is marked as expiry on 0000Z the next day), right? [1] All the APIs that give unix timestamps I have seen work this way. However, adjtimex() (it does not just set the clock, it can get the clock as well) return value can be used to correct the clock. [2] One would think that expiry times are always exclusive, but X.509 has inclusive expiry time (e.g., expiry at 2400Z is marked as expiry on 235959Z the same day). -Ilari
Received on Friday, 2 December 2022 15:01:44 UTC