Re: [ltans] RFC 3161 Token

Markus Isler <isler@keyon.ch> Thu, 26 April 2012 18:17 UTC

Return-Path: <isler@keyon.ch>
X-Original-To: ltans@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ltans@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E607421E8107 for <ltans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:17:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.389
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.389 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.210, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3INp9did2Omp for <ltans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:17:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from keyon.ch (keyon.ch [91.193.21.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 54A9621E80A1 for <ltans@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:17:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 16633 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2012 18:18:24 -0000
Received: from keyon.ch (91.193.21.20) by keyon.ch with QMTP; 26 Apr 2012 18:18:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 4611 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2012 18:17:17 -0000
Received: from mail.keyon.local (10.20.0.25) by gateway.keyon.local with SMTP; 26 Apr 2012 18:17:17 -0000
Received: from MAIL.keyon.local ([fe80::7d9f:46c8:e003:9d25]) by mail.keyon.local ([fe80::7d9f:46c8:e003:9d25%11]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.002; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 20:17:11 +0200
From: Markus Isler <isler@keyon.ch>
To: "ltans@ietf.org" <ltans@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [ltans] RFC 3161 Token
Thread-Index: Ac0jvLGIEVYdYKHkS7KY4E8wUkDeSQAA1OSAAAYx0XA=
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 18:17:11 +0000
Message-ID: <A42A925F-00DF-4785-8E14-9699C934227D@keyon.ch>
References: <59E0E1DB40095E47AC604C81EE613F0C189D1EF3@mail.keyon.local>, <4F9983B5.5080605@gondrom.org>
In-Reply-To: <4F9983B5.5080605@gondrom.org>
Accept-Language: de-CH, en-US
Content-Language: de-DE
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_A42A925F00DF47858E149699C934227Dkeyonch_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [ltans] RFC 3161 Token
X-BeenThere: ltans@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: LTANS Working Group <ltans.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ltans>, <mailto:ltans-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltans>
List-Post: <mailto:ltans@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ltans-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltans>, <mailto:ltans-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 18:17:59 -0000

Hi Tobias

Thanks for clarifying.

Regards
Markus


Am 26.04.2012 um 19:20 schrieb "Tobias Gondrom" <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org<mailto:tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org>>:

Hi,

yes it is the Time-Stamp Token and not the TimeStampResp, ....

And if I may say so, I think the RFC is pretty clear on that one in all sections:
e.g. "      <TimeStamp> is REQUIRED and holds a <TimeStampToken> element with
      a Time-Stamp Token (as defined in Section 3.1.2) provided by the
      Time-Stamping Authority and an OPTIONAL element
      <CryptographicInformationList>."

Please also take a read at section 3.1.2.

Regards, Tobias



On 26/04/12 23:14, Markus Isler wrote:
Hi

Just for clarification. For an RFC3161 type Time-Stamp Token, the <TimeStamp>  element MUST contain base64 encoding of a DER-encoded ASN1 data of TimeStampToken.

TimeStampToken ::= ContentInfo

And not the base64 encoding of a DER-encoded ASN1 data of TimeStampResp?


TimeStampResp ::= SEQUENCE  {

      status                  PKIStatusInfo,

      timeStampToken          TimeStampToken     OPTIONAL  }

Is that correct?

Regards
Markus



_______________________________________________
ltans mailing list
ltans@ietf.org<mailto:ltans@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltans


_______________________________________________
ltans mailing list
ltans@ietf.org<mailto:ltans@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltans