Subject: Timestamp: id for token

From: "Manger, James H" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 17:50:04 +1000

Is a standardised unambiguous identifier for a timestamp token really needed
or wanted?

Such an identifier is useful for a certificate as a certificate is used in
many messages (many SSL sessions, many S/MIME emails, many transactions,
...).  The certificate is independent of any particular use.  A timestamp,
however, is only relevant to a single message - corresponding to its
messageImprint field.

The are no timestamp revocation lists.  There are no other messages from a
TSA that need to refer to a specific timestamp.

It seems sensible to store a timestamp with its corresponding message - so
now identifier is needed.  Even if they were stored separately the
implementation could its own labels to maintain the link, i.e. it does not
need an explicit field within the timestamp.

---

From: Joerg Seidel <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 12:20:33 +0200

I agree on what James wrote. A unique identifier or serial number is not
necessary.