Tony,
The padding field is exactly defined this way in RFC 3971 (although a
Pad Length field was present on the -04 version of the SEND draft). I
think the draft-ietf-csi-proxy-send-01 document only reuses the format
of the badly defined RSA Signature Option.
Ah, OK.
If RFC 3971 was to be updated, I agree that a padding length field
should be defined somewhere in the RSA (or XXX) Signature Option. Was
there a rational behind its removal during the RFC 3971
standardisation process ?
I can't recall. Maybe this is one of the bugs that we need to fix. Or
perhaps there is a way to determine the lengths but neither of us can't
just see it right now. In any case, it should be clearly specified in
3971bis and the proxy-send drafts.
Jari
_______________________________________________
CGA-EXT mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cga-ext
