Re: [Trans] [trans] #74 (rfc6962-bis): normative statement of TLS client behavior in Section 3Re: [Trans] [trans] #74 (rfc6962-bis): normative statement of TLS client behavior in Section 3
Ben Laurie
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/7P15fL7F7FPIQiYXn_XuKVyb_XY/
2058146
1646675
Re: [Trans] [trans] #76 (rfc6962-bis): Normative client behavior specified in Section 3.4Re: [Trans] [trans] #76 (rfc6962-bis): Normative client behavior specified in Section 3.4
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/iNAta3_psYK0FWUbLr4PWQb09pI/
2058141
1646673
Re: [Trans] [trans] #94 (rfc6962-bis): Fetching of inclusion proofs: Why and when are clients expected to do this?Re: [Trans] [trans] #94 (rfc6962-bis): Fetching of inclusion proofs: Why and when are clients expected to do this?
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/qh2iw6tWSVi5Xwa3wG27BvjDBds/
2058079
1646619
Re: [Trans] [trans] #94 (rfc6962-bis): Fetching of inclusion proofs: Why and when are clients expected to do this?Re: [Trans] [trans] #94 (rfc6962-bis): Fetching of inclusion proofs: Why and when are clients expected to do this?
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/qVOeMkYGSM6svGfkjKyaSFqwfVU/
2058069
1646619
Re: [Trans] [trans] #83 (rfc6962-bis): CT should mandate the use of deterministic ECDSARe: [Trans] [trans] #83 (rfc6962-bis): CT should mandate the use of deterministic ECDSA
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/t-VtrDtsSPaEBN7BoucdTfH28yI/
2058067
1646653
Re: [Trans] [trans] #93 (rfc6962-bis): Monitor description: Inconsistency between intro and section 5.4Re: [Trans] [trans] #93 (rfc6962-bis): Monitor description: Inconsistency between intro and section 5.4
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/9UpmYL_PhxpDnT3l4FvG-6MYowM/
2058066
1646620
Re: [Trans] [trans] #83 (rfc6962-bis): CT should mandate the use of deterministic ECDSARe: [Trans] [trans] #83 (rfc6962-bis): CT should mandate the use of deterministic ECDSA
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/ufKHD6mHT1O5HufwT99QjDEhKF4/
2058065
1646653
Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STHspecneedstodefinetop-levelextension syntaxRe: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STHspecneedstodefinetop-levelextension syntax
Rob Stradling
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/Mvsrv7FNZ8gLcQmn4Bb-ESGsyf8/
2058060
1646621
Re: [Trans] [trans] #83 (rfc6962-bis): CT should mandate the use of deterministic ECDSARe: [Trans] [trans] #83 (rfc6962-bis): CT should mandate the use of deterministic ECDSA
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/lcI120ABsz7bvIahJbgaHCUaxFA/
2058047
1646653
Re: [Trans] Review of draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct-02Re: [Trans] Review of draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct-02
Ben Laurie
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/DeDSVvAmcxHQj69igcO8xCRYD_g/
2058032
1646622
[Trans] [trans] #97 (rfc6962-bis): Allocate an OID for CMS precertificates[Trans] [trans] #97 (rfc6962-bis): Allocate an OID for CMS precertificates
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/8FYN7OllHTmBcfb0p6sYcxCuyP4/
2058028
1646615
Re: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): Should the response size to get-entries be a part of the log metadata? (was: The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata)Re: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): Should the response size to get-entries be a part of the log metadata? (was: The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata)
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/5-_EOMT9npoAAR9LxTQEKZSRLlk/
2058026
1646618
Re: [Trans] [trans] #83 (rfc6962-bis): CT should mandate the use of deterministic ECDSARe: [Trans] [trans] #83 (rfc6962-bis): CT should mandate the use of deterministic ECDSA
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/mR5aVwZ_SKEXOFgb7Vt5MZfuWdM/
2058023
1646653
Re: [Trans] [trans] #83 (rfc6962-bis): CT should mandate the use of deterministic ECDSARe: [Trans] [trans] #83 (rfc6962-bis): CT should mandate the use of deterministic ECDSA
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/4WBjm6SxtJyLchDzRSmsiGR1wWY/
2058022
1646653
Re: [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic?Re: [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic?
Stephen Kent
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/x6ymQLEbChCEB9Ztqhyh41b9F7c/
2058018
1646616
Re: [Trans] [trans] #79 (rfc6962-bis): Precertificate signature must be over something other than just the TBSCertificateRe: [Trans] [trans] #79 (rfc6962-bis): Precertificate signature must be over something other than just the TBSCertificate
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/nv4J_B4EHhtA0pT3wFqLRWjZUZQ/
2058015
1646659
Re: [Trans] [trans] #93 (client-behavior): Monitor description: Inconsistency between intro and section 5.4Re: [Trans] [trans] #93 (client-behavior): Monitor description: Inconsistency between intro and section 5.4
Stephen Kent
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/g-Dh8C10BXbGcjPdnffGOmEMAKA/
2058010
1646620
Re: [Trans] [trans] #79 (rfc6962-bis): Precertificate signature must be over something other than just the TBSCertificateRe: [Trans] [trans] #79 (rfc6962-bis): Precertificate signature must be over something other than just the TBSCertificate
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/VYcCzsYM6esh1Ny2rFBomS7fJWk/
2058004
1646659
Re: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadataRe: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/L8_a39fHuVmrpErVDt5Om2nXu7E/
2058001
1646618
Re: [Trans] [trans] #79 (rfc6962-bis): Precertificate signature must be over something other than just the TBSCertificateRe: [Trans] [trans] #79 (rfc6962-bis): Precertificate signature must be over something other than just the TBSCertificate
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/9rg5eXgIxSL10yFLrqeKNghx1Dk/
2058000
1646659
Re: [Trans] Review of draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct-02Re: [Trans] Review of draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct-02
Linus Nordberg
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/4PdABQqjJ6KBy1LYG_kEaYgXdXA/
2057999
1646622
Re: [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic?Re: [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic?
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/37HJqJd7A31NR3DNRzrdMwIXgaE/
2057991
1646616
Re: [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic?Re: [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic?
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/pqMdGsakp498kTtxisiB3XgLNus/
2057988
1646616
[Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic?[Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic?
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/t3NGvvlWXcJ6KuTTHu7p225GWeI/
2057961
1646616
[Trans] Adopt Gossip I-D?[Trans] Adopt Gossip I-D?
Ben Laurie
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/ePIcmVTeF9kSwrfvj9CTrVctbLo/
2057960
1646617
Re: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadataRe: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/z_n00a7-chdhiS5hrf7-e_o_FK0/
2057951
1646618
[Trans] [trans] #95 (client-behavior): The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata[Trans] [trans] #95 (client-behavior): The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/_cp8392hQApFnNFjZaAhBykJy_o/
2057949
1646618
Re: [Trans] [trans] #93 (client-behavior): Monitor description: Inconsistency between intro and section 5.4Re: [Trans] [trans] #93 (client-behavior): Monitor description: Inconsistency between intro and section 5.4
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/p14i9Z4Slmh3vVRvbrlpBA59y_M/
2057940
1646620
[Trans] [trans] #94 (client-behavior): Fetching of inclusion proofs: Why and when are clients expected to do this?[Trans] [trans] #94 (client-behavior): Fetching of inclusion proofs: Why and when are clients expected to do this?
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/3VvobAyCp14kzpruFz9fWPKBDJI/
2057925
1646619
[Trans] [trans] #93 (client-behavior): Monitor description: Inconsistency between intro and section 5.4[Trans] [trans] #93 (client-behavior): Monitor description: Inconsistency between intro and section 5.4
trans issue tracker
2015-07-23
trans
/arch/msg/trans/W7jZh3MPfZ3ZISgCR0j9FOm0wOQ/
2057920
1646620
Re: [Trans] [trans] #79 (rfc6962-bis): Precertificate signature must be over something other than just the TBSCertificateRe: [Trans] [trans] #79 (rfc6962-bis): Precertificate signature must be over something other than just the TBSCertificate
trans issue tracker
2015-07-22
trans
/arch/msg/trans/xhCXFxh5KUVQaK0sbgUKiSANC74/
2057697
1646659
Re: [Trans] [trans] #83 (rfc6962-bis): CT should mandate the use of deterministic ECDSARe: [Trans] [trans] #83 (rfc6962-bis): CT should mandate the use of deterministic ECDSA
trans issue tracker
2015-07-22
trans
/arch/msg/trans/BNdez57RgWPoYbyzzWinRCVUSdM/
2057691
1646653
Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH specneedstodefinetop-levelextension syntaxRe: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH specneedstodefinetop-levelextension syntax
Stephen Kent
2015-07-22
trans
/arch/msg/trans/J-vfKJ52vju93W5k9eWIBMSzYO8/
2057097
1646621
Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needs todefinetop-levelextension syntaxRe: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needs todefinetop-levelextension syntax
Ben Laurie
2015-07-22
trans
/arch/msg/trans/AyrsWcYa0kIXkQKmJvVfSm2N5vc/
2056824
1646623
Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH specneedstodefinetop-levelextension syntaxRe: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH specneedstodefinetop-levelextension syntax
Rob Stradling
2015-07-20
trans
/arch/msg/trans/UDkkzchumsNWbKOKfwJ7UCue4o4/
2055003
1646621
Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needstodefinetop-levelextension syntaxRe: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needstodefinetop-levelextension syntax
Rob Stradling
2015-07-20
trans
/arch/msg/trans/6BhU5iuuekpfHucoq5wykPMqK1E/
2054973
1646623
Re: [Trans] [trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needs to define top-level extension syntaxRe: [Trans] [trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needs to define top-level extension syntax
trans issue tracker
2015-07-20
trans
/arch/msg/trans/bQdiJc8vFWB70JcR5auxREb9D0Q/
2054963
1646689
Re: [Trans] [trans] #77 (rfc6962-bis): normative clientbehaviorspecified in Section 5Re: [Trans] [trans] #77 (rfc6962-bis): normative clientbehaviorspecified in Section 5
Stephen Kent
2015-07-20
trans
/arch/msg/trans/n-kMafcSgLUpu_ThQDs5syq9DyI/
2054921
1646672
[Trans] Review of draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct-02[Trans] Review of draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct-02
Ben Laurie
2015-07-20
trans
/arch/msg/trans/RnW_zE3MW03uinBhjo_Ziwp-odo/
2054828
1646622
Re: [Trans] [trans] #75 (rfc6962-bis): run on sentence in section 3Re: [Trans] [trans] #75 (rfc6962-bis): run on sentence in section 3
trans issue tracker
2015-07-20
trans
/arch/msg/trans/-z_V0bqBKUEDLhaheQWSs2tH_5M/
2054744
1646674