Hi Russ, all, How about:
OLD: A signed TAL is an RPKI signed object, as specified in [RFC6488]. NEW: The signed TAL object uses the standard template for specifying signed objects that can be validated using the RPKI [RFC6488], which is based on Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) [RFC5652] as a standard encapsulation format. (Relevant text included and paraphrased from 6488) Tim > On 22 Mar 2018, at 18:44, Russ Housley <[email protected]> wrote: > > Tim: > > I think that a statement in Section 3 that it uses CMS SignedData [RFC5652] > would make this very clear. > > Russ > > >> On Mar 22, 2018, at 1:07 PM, Tim Bruijnzeels <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Russ, >> >> Yes, this is a CMS object. Section 3 describes this. It’s an extension of >> RPKI Signed Object - which is CMS.- and specifies the relevant content type >> (3.1) and eContent (3.2). >> >> Tim >> >>> On 22 Mar 2018, at 17:02, Russ Housley <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Is the intent to use CMS to sign the trust anchor list? Since ROAs are >>> signed with CMS, I was expecting these signatures to follow the same >>> convention. However, there is no reference to CMS in the draft. >>> >>> Russ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> sidr mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
