"David F. Skoll" <[email protected]> wrote: > Andrzej Adam Filip wrote: > >> IMHO you should "generalize" support for different signature types >> e.g. 1 extra byte for signature length and 1 extra byte for signature type > > I'm not sure what you mean by "signature types". Could you explain? > Are you referring to the truncated HMAC? > [...]
Yes. IMHO you should create protocol capable to support other "sender signature" types even if for long time only one type is going to be supported. -- [pl>en: Andrew] Andrzej Adam Filip : [email protected] Luck, that's when preparation and opportunity meet. -- P. E. Trudeau _______________________________________________ NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it. Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
