0

So, RFC5816 https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5816.txt changes the specification of RFC3161 https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3161.txt

RFC3161 specifies the 'version' field in TSTInfo to be set to 1

Why does RFC5816 not change the value of this field? wouldn't that be exactly the idea of this field? If not, how else would a new version need to be defined so that it would make sense to change the value in this version field?

matthias_buehlmann
  • 565
  • 4
  • 12
  • Have you tried contacting the authors? It's extremely difficult for uninvolved people to judge the intent of someone. Their e-mail addresses are in the RFC so sending them a professionally worded e-mail asking for the rationale behind this should do the trick. –  Feb 08 '21 at 14:43
  • 5816 changes the _token_ which is the CMS SignedData that _wraps_ TSTInfo, but it doesn't change TSTInfo at all even in the slightest. If the structure of data in TSTInfo was changed it would make sense to change its version. – dave_thompson_085 Feb 09 '21 at 04:08
  • @dave_thompson_085 that is correct, but according to the specification, the version field "describes the version of the time-stamp token." and the time-stamp token is the wrapping ContentInfo, not the wrapped TSTInfo - and the specification makes restrictions for this ContentInfo – matthias_buehlmann Feb 09 '21 at 04:10

0 Answers0