Re: [TSP] misc comments

[tho <thomas.fossati@xxxxxx>]

Denis,
 
On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 09:03:59AM +0100, Denis Pinkas wrote:
> >>>rfc3161 says:
> >>>
> >>>"The reqPolicy field, if included, indicates the TSA policy under
> >>> which the TimeStampToken SHOULD be provided."
> >>>
> >>>but in a different paragraph it is said - so mixing MUST and SHOULD:
> >>>
> >>>"If a similar field was present in the TimeStampReq, then it
> >>> MUST have the same value, otherwise an error unacceptedPolicy)
> >>> MUST be returned"
> >>
> >>What happens if the requested policy is not supported ? Hence why in that
> >>case a TSU will report an error.
> >
> >
> > But there is no TimeStampToken provided in case the requested policy is
> > not supported.  There is instead a failure with unacceptedPolicy.
>
> Please read again the two sentences you quote.

done :-)

> They are correct and do not need to be changed.

I disagree:

'SHOULD' in the first sentence is referred to 'TimeStampToken',
so the reader takes it as: it is recommended to produce a TimeStampToken
with policy = reqPolicy.

So since this is only recommended, one could potentially create a 
TimeStampToken with policy != reqPolicy which isn't the case, since the 
second sentence says: there MUST be no TimeStampToken if the supported 
policy != reqPolicy.


Thomas