W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > April to June 2001

RE: Comments on 22 June Version...

From: Brian LaMacchia <bal@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 12:52:06 -0700
Message-ID: <BCDB2C3F59F5744EBE37C715D66E779CEAB729@red-msg-04.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
Cc: <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. [mailto:reagle@w3.org]
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 11:51 AM
> To: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
> Cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org; Brian LaMacchia
> Subject: Re: Comments on 22 June Version...
> 
> >Section 4.4.5: Seems a bit odd in just saying that PGPKeyID is a
> >string.  Actually, I belive, PGPKeyID's are 8 octet binary quantities
> >so it would seem like it should say they are Base64 encoded...
> 
> I'm not sure. Brian?

[bal] Don's right, PGP Key IDs are 64-bit values.  I suspect we said
"string" here because traditionally PGP clients display KeyIDs as
"0x"-prefixed hex strings (and usually only the low 32 bits at that).
It seems reasonable to me to change PGPKeyID to be a Base64-encoded
value; I can't see any reason to introduce yet another encoding into
XMLDSIG.

					--bal
 
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2001 17:54:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:10:05 UTC