On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 01:30:08PM +0100, Rob Stradling wrote:
> On 25/10/16 11:26, Paul Hadfield wrote:
> <snip>
> > This may be too late for 6962-bis:
> 
> Maybe.  Maybe not.  Let's discuss it anyway.  :-)
> 
>   I have been thinking about how an
> > auditor’s task might be easier if Logs were required to retain their
> > historic STHs and provide them on request.  It could be done by adding
> > an API along the lines of ‘get-sth-at-time’ or ‘get-sths-between-times’.
> > (where the first returns the STH with largest timestamp <= the timestamp
> > requested, and the second returns a list of STHs with timestamps in
> > the range requested).
> 
> Alternatively, historic STHs could be looked up by historic tree sizes.
> My suggestion...

You can get multiple signatures for the same tree size / hash
currently. Do you want the first. the last, or some random STH in
that case?

>   - if the "tree_size" input is specified:
>     - the "sth" output contains the latest STH that existed back when
> the tree was that size.
>     - a "next_tree_size" output is also returned, which an auditor could
> then specify as the "tree_size" input to a further get-sth call.  (The
> auditor would then call get-sth repeatedly until the "next_tree_size"
> output is omitted, which would indicate that the very latest STH was
> just returned).

You can already ask for the latest one, not for the size of a
previous one.

What if there was no STH of that size? Give the larger? The
smaller? just the next / prev size?


Kurt

_______________________________________________
Trans mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans

Reply via email to