IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [saag] Date formats: RFC3339 vs. RFC 5322

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Thu, 15 April 2021 14:36 UTC

Return-Path: <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21FD83A223D for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:36:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.971
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.971 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ReqrtsilkZfw for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:36:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ppsw-32.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-32.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.132]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B64C93A2243 for <saag@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:36:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://help.uis.cam.ac.uk/email-scanner-virus
Received: from [84.9.76.236] (port=54775 helo=milebook.lan) by ppsw-32.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.156]:25) with esmtpsa (PLAIN:fanf2) (TLS1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) id 1lX36G-000hAR-2e (Exim 4.94) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Thu, 15 Apr 2021 15:36:08 +0100
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 15:36:08 +0100
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
To: Henry Story <henry.story@gmail.com>
cc: Yakov Shafranovich <yakov@nightwatchcybersecurity.com>, saag@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <ADC7ED48-8D36-41C0-9AD5-3154419216C7@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e12df051-2dfe-c9c7-fe52-3d89322acf9@dotat.at>
References: <CAAyEnSMBdXCA0EvgR79P_1gi15pAPfeyu_HgGqgMjWxRP8sxKg@mail.gmail.com> <ADC7ED48-8D36-41C0-9AD5-3154419216C7@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: Tony Finch <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/saag/9lcddJYKOdoW2Qy3qq8JR6QFtIA>
Subject: Re: [saag] Date formats: RFC3339 vs. RFC 5322
X-BeenThere: saag@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Advisory Group <saag.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/saag/>
List-Post: <mailto:saag@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 14:36:31 -0000

Henry Story <henry.story@gmail.com> wrote:

> What about unix time: seconds or milliseconds since the Unix Epoch?

Not human-readable or writable.

It's very easy to turn an RFC 3339 date-time into POSIX time.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  https://dotat.at/
Rattray Head to Berwick upon Tweed: Southerly or southeasterly 3 or 4,
occasionally variable 2 in south, increasing 5 at times later in far
north. Smooth or slight. Fair. Good.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email