[187] in Kerberos_V5_Development
timestamps in tickets.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Clifford Neuman)
Thu Feb 15 15:09:58 1990
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 90 12:08:55 -0800
From: bcn@CS.WASHINGTON.EDU (Clifford Neuman)
To: sommerfeld@APOLLO.COM
Cc: jtkohl@ATHENA.MIT.EDU, krbdev@ATHENA.MIT.EDU, jis@ATHENA.MIT.EDU,
In-Reply-To: Bill Sommerfeld's message of Wed, 14 Feb 90 15:39:11 EST <9002142319.AA20372@xuucp.ch.apollo.com>
I agree with Bill. If we are going to OSIfy the protocol, and if we
can still be ASN.1 conformant without using 14 byte timestamps, then
that is the route we should take. In fact, the timestamp length was
my primary concern about the ASN.1 version. Is there someone who knows
enough about ASN.1 (and the OSI committees) that could tell us if we
can do things this way and still be consiered OSI conformant?
~ Cliff
