[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: time-stamp-draft-7
Joerg,
Thanks for your careful writing. We came form a maximum tagging
version (which was safe) to a minimum one. It is hard to do minimal
tagging by thinking to all the various combinations.
You are right. Thanks for providing a change proposal.
Denis
> Denis,
>
> maybe the TSTInfo structure has some inconvenience because of the missing tags
> now:
>
> time-stamp-draft-7: IMPLIZIT tagging
>
> TSTInfo ::= SEQUENCE {
> [...]
> tsa GeneralName OPTIONAL,
> extensions [0] Extensions OPTIONAL
> }
>
> X.509 IMPLIZIT: Tagging:
>
> GeneralName ::= CHOICE {
> otherName [0] OtherName,
> rfc822Name [1] IA5String,
> dNSName [2] IA5String,
> x400Address [3] ORAddress,
> directoryName [4] Name,
> ediPartyName [5] EDIPartyName,
> uniformResourceIdentifier [6] IA5String,
> iPAddress [7] OCTET STRING,
> registeredID [8] OBJECT IDENTIFIER}
>
> OtherName ::= SEQUENCE {
> type-id OBJECT IDENTIFIER,
> value [0] EXPLICIT ANY DEFINED BY type-id }
>
> Extensions ::= SEQUENCE SIZE (1..MAX) OF Extension
>
> The parser can't ditinguish between the "GeneralName" field and "[0]
> Extensions" in case that the GeneralName choice is "[0] OtherName". Since both
> OtherName and Extensions are sequences the tag will be encoded identically and
> can't be used to distinguish the two optional entries. They could only
> distinguished by checking the tag of the content of the sequence. That isn't
> very convinient for implementations.
>
> I suggest changing the tagging to:
>
> TSTInfo ::= SEQUENCE {
> [...]
> tsa [0] GeneralName OPTIONAL,
> extensions [1] Extensions OPTIONAL
> }
>
> Jorg
>
> --
> timeproof phone +49-40-76629-1911
> Development fax +49-40-76629-551
> Harburger Schloßstraße 6-12 mailto:seidel@timeproof.de
> D-21079 Hamburg http://www.timeproof.de