[x500standard] SV: [Spam] Re: [pkix] SV: [Spam] Re: DER encoding of certificates
- From: "Erik Andersen" <era@xxxxxxx>
- To: "'Anders Rundgren'" <anders.rundgren@xxxxxxxxx>, <x500standard@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <pkix@xxxxxxxx>, <t09sg17q11@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 10:56:42 +0200
You should bother as X.509 is the recommendation most downloaded of all
ITU-T Recommendations and is an important PKI/PMI player. When updating
X.509 it is important to consult also the PKIX experts.
Erik Andersen
Andersen's L-Service
Elsevej 48,
DK-3500 Vaerloese
Denmark
Mobile: +45 2097 1490
e-amail: era@xxxxxxx
Skype: andersen-erik
http://www.x500.eu/
http://www.x500standard.com/
http://dk.linkedin.com/in/andersenerik
-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: pkix-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:pkix-bounces@xxxxxxxx] På vegne af Anders
Rundgren
Sendt: 8. juli 2011 06:59
Til: x500standard@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; pkix@xxxxxxxx; t09sg17q11@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Emne: [Spam] Re: [pkix] [x500standard] SV: [Spam] Re: DER encoding of
certificates
Why should PKIX bother with a document that isn't normative for
PKI anymore?
For a PKIX-version of this topic I would make a difference between
"certificate producers" that indeed SHOULD/MUST generate DER
encoding while "certificate consumers" SHOULD NOT break due to
incorrect decoding. Certificate consumers in browsers are already
dealing with pretty broken certificates.
--anders
_______________________________________________
pkix mailing list
pkix@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix
-----
www.x500standard.com: The central source for information on the X.500 Directory
Standard.
Other related posts:
