Hi Jon, Thanks for the interesting post - that's actually clarified a few pgp things for me that I've always glossed over. Jon Callas wrote: [...good stuff, then...]
Is it *that* hard to make this part of TAM, and have type constants for PKIX, X.509, SPKI, DNSsec, SAML, XML-whatever, DKIM, etc.?
Tend to agree. One more TLV isn't very much to ask at all, assuming this becomes a new WG. If this work were to be done inside PKIX then that extra TLV would probably open too many cans of worms, perhaps sufficient to make that good idea become a bad idea;-) Cheers, S.
