On Thursday 25 April 2002 00:40, Donald Eastlake 3rd wrote: > Seems to me that we should stick with the current implemented URI for > the currently implemented algorithm with the current parameters. This sounds like the best bet to me. What we have does work, and it might not be the best format for future parameters but that bridge can be crossed when encountered. (A new identifier/namespace and all the parameters desired can be proposed.) So I'm going to stick with the text I have now in [1] and consider the issue closed unless someone wants to document their dissent. [1] http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/Drafts/xmlenc-core/Overview.html#sec-RSA-OAEP $Revision: 1.184 $ on $Date: 2002/04/17 13:17:07 $ GMTReceived on Thursday, 25 April 2002 16:16:28 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:13:08 UTC