Re: NEW ISSUE; wsa:To interaction with application protocols

> Or whether it makes sense to say that omission of a <wsa:To> is
> equivalent to including one with the well know 'anonymous' URI as its
> value.

How about the empty element, <was:To/>?  It's a lot less confusing to see
a signed empty element then it is to recognize that an added element
isn't covered by the appropriate signature.
	/r$
-- 
Rich Salz                  Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology       http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gateway  http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
XML Security Overview      http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html

Received on Friday, 17 December 2004 02:09:35 UTC