No takers on this one? On 2015-12-09 08:12, Anders Rundgren wrote:
The following extract from a recent ACME posting indicates that I'm not the only one who see use-cases for such:It's not a bad idea to specify the agreement-integrity as a dictionary instead so in that future case, there's not problem of checksum negotiation: "agreement-integrity": {"sha512": "3Ys8QL9di54ggXIGBAS2RHr_W6cMurZPizhZihkQjwl3VG2dpXZYmsYZ0B7LG-tWlVE9- Hwp9hL3Mosvbr6lCA"} In my work I used the names S128, S256, and S512. Anders
_______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
