[x500standard] Re: Revocation list definitions
- From: "Erik Andersen" <era@xxxxxxx>
- To: <x500standard@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'SG17-Q11'" <T13sg17q11@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 16:45:42 +0200
Hi David,
As to issue 2: My point is that different parts of X.509 say different
things, which means that we have to make a decision either way.
Erik
-----Original Message-----
From: x500standard-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:x500standard-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Chadwick
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 4:37 PM
To: x500standard@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; SG17-Q11
Subject: [x500standard] Re: Revocation list definitions
On 25/04/2014 14:59, Erik Andersen wrote:
> David Cooper wrote:
>
>
>
> "Contrary to what the defect report says, X.509 intentionally defined
> CRL to include revocation lists that covered public-key certificates
> and revocation lists that covered attribute certificates,"
>
There are two issues here
1. The use of the acronym CRL. To what does it refer 2. Whether a single
revocation list can include both PKCs and ACs.
David are you addressing the first point only, or both points? If the
latter, what are you saying about point 2.
regards
David
-----
www.x500standard.com: The central source for information on the X.500
Directory Standard.
-----
www.x500standard.com: The central source for information on the X.500 Directory
Standard.
Other related posts:
