[Top] [All Lists]

Re: draft-ietf-822ext-md5-00.txt

1993-04-06 16:36:46
1.  I'm guessing you chose to call the header field content-md5 so that
    the choice of algorithm was explicit and it would not be necessary
    to parse the value of the header into two parts: algorithm
    identifier and value.

It was done this way on purpose.  Like content-transfer-encodings,
having a lot of content-mic algorithms would be a bad thing.  So, for
simplicity, it's better, I think, to have a single field.

2.  This document will ultimately require a security considerations
    section in which it will be necessary to distinguish between the
    service provided by this specification and the service provided by a
    secure data integrity service.  For example:

I'll add a security considerations section.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>