- From: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
- Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 22:40:21 -0400
- To: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
- cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org, Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com
Joseph: I'll provide new RetrievalMethod text tomorrow or the next day and talk with you about the other item. Donald (Just returned from ten day vacation...) From: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org> Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 15:17:29 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Message-Id: <200009051917.PAA15733@www19.w3.org> Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20000905151622.00b39a10@rpcp.mit.edu> Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 15:16:52 -0400 To: "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <dee3@torque.pothole.com> Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org, Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com In-Reply-To: <200009050622.CAA01910@torque.pothole.com> >Who/when is the action item on sending text to the list? > >At 02:22 9/5/2000 -0400, Donald E. Eastlake 3rd wrote: >>RSA Signature Format: >> URIs to identify wrapping of the Signature? >> include OIDs? >>Inclusion of the algorithm OIDs within the secured >>potion of the signature is needed for security. No one saw >>any reason to include plain text OIDs outside that area. >>The current specification that such an OID prefix is included >>should be dropped. >> >>Raw X.509 Cert Type: >> The consensus on the call was that adding a RetrievalMethod >>Type for a binary X.509 certificate was a good idea. It was >>also clarified that the Type should specify the type of the >>data AFTER application of the transforms. So, for example, one >>could retrieve a plain Base 64 encoded certificate and use it >>with this type by providing a Base 64 decode transform. > > > >_________________________________________________________ >Joseph Reagle Jr. >W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org >IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/ >
Received on Tuesday, 5 September 2000 22:37:17 UTC