Closed tuple71 closed 2 years ago
SHOULD != MUST Moreover, the choice of which signed Interest elements are included should be left up to the application (it's an app-level protocol decision). That's how we're implementing it in ndn-cxx: https://gerrit.named-data.net/c/ndn-cxx/+/6221
Currently, in the ndn-cxx/security/validation-policy-command-interest.cpp, ValidationPolicyCommandInterest::parseCommandInterest() is checked timestamp in case of SignedInterestFormat::V03.
I checked your implementation(https://gerrit.named-data.net/c/ndn-cxx/+/6221)
Command interest is NOT equivalent to signed interest. Command interest is a special subcategory/extension of signed interest with more specific rules and is mostly a remnant of the old signed interest format.
I know. Signed interest is being implemented now and is not currently released on ndn-cxx master branch. When will it be released?
Thank you for bringing this question up. These fields should be written by the signer, but I haven't written this part yet. Currently there is no stable application that is making use of these, so I don't know which one is better.
I know. Signed interest is being implemented now and is not currently released on ndn-cxx master branch. When will it be released?
ndn-cxx-0.7.1 has a complete implementation of the v0.3 Signed Interest format.
The InterestSignatureInfo element SHOULD include at least one of the following elements: SignatureNonce, SignatureTime, SignatureSeqNum.