Probably all the better...
On 11/7/23 08:48, Göran Selander wrote:
Hi Mike, Carsten,
It is already in there, but using ‘null’ instead of ‘false’:
”The value "99991231235959Z" (no expiration date) is encoded as CBOR
null.”
See bullet “validity” in this section:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-cose-cbor-encoded-cert-07#name-message-fields
Göran
*From: *Carsten Bormann <[email protected]>
*Date: *Tuesday, 7 November 2023 at 14:26
*To: *Mike Ounsworth <[email protected]>
*Cc: *[email protected]
<[email protected]>, [email protected]
<[email protected]>
*Subject: *Re: [COSE] draft-ietf-cose-cbor-encoded-cert: make NotAfter
optional
On 2023-11-07, at 13:45, Mike Ounsworth
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> could notAfter be made optional in C509?
If that seems to far a step, let’s just use
false
for
99991231235959Z
Grüße, Carsten
_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
