Re: Time-stamping: IETF / ISO

[tgindin@xxxxxxxxxx]

     Surely no apology is necessary.  If everyone who produced ASN.1 which
was later revised were considered at fault, no one would use it (which
perhaps would be a good thing, or perhaps not).  However, this leaves open
the question of whether the IETF specification should accomodate the ISO
one somewhat.  First, should the mechanismNotSupported bit be added to
PKIFailureInfo in the PKIX draft?  Second, should the ISO ASN.1 format for
TimeStampReq and TSTInfo be documented in an appendix to the PKIX draft,
pointing out that these are fully compatible with the PKIX definitions
within the existing draft?
     I realize that these suggestions come after last call completion, and
thus may be ruled out of order.

          Tom Gindin


Roland Mueller <roland@tuvit.net> on 02/11/2000 04:16:52 PM

To:   Tom Gindin/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
cc:   Manuel Heras Gilsanz <mheras@vtools.es>, ietf-pkix@imc.org,
      Denis.Pinkas@bull.net
Subject:  Re: Time-stamping: IETF / ISO



This is a good idea and I apologize for not thinking of that. We will
set it up this way that the IETF mechanism is the default mechanism and
thus having away to add mechanisms if required.

Roland