Re: draft-housley-binarytime-00.txt

[Russ Housley <[e-mail]>]

Yes, I have an application.  It is using BinaryTime in the content, and the 
desire is to use the same date/time format throughout the application.

The application itself is not ready for release to the IETF, and it may 
never be released to the IETF.  However, please take a look at 
draft-housley-cms-fw-wrap.  This has many properties in common with the 
application that is not yet ready for release.  Basically, a content type 
is defined, and the use of CMS to protect that content type is 
specified.  S/MIME is not used, only CMS.

Russ


At 07:15 AM 9/17/2004, Peter Sylvester wrote:

> > Peter:
> >
> > You are asking about the signing-time signed attribute.
> >
> > My comments were about the use of BinaryTime in general.
>
>You are not answering my questions. may I conclude that you have no
>application at all at hand? if so, what is the experiment?
>
>The proposed text concerns a a signing-time attribute.
>
> >
> > Russ
> >
> > At 09:13 AM 9/15/2004, Peter Sylvester wrote:
> > > > Comparison of a date/time value in a protocol to the current time 
> from the
> > > > operating system seems very obvious to me.
> > >
> > >And that comparison should lead to what result? The signature is too old,
> > >not yet valid? What application are you thinking about? secure NTP?