IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-housley-tls-authz-extns-07.txt to Proposed Standard

David Morris <dwm@xpasc.com> Wed, 11 February 2009 23:14 UTC

Return-Path: <dwm@xpasc.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AC783A6A20 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:14:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V3rPzv2WwQBi for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:14:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from email.xpasc.com (email.xpasc.com [65.85.17.142]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7A6A3A69C9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:14:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bslepgate.xpasc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by bslepgate.xpasc.com (Postfix-out) with ESMTP id EB842101837; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:14:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Propel-Return-Path: <dwm@xpasc.com>
Received: from email.xpasc.com ([10.1.2.88]) by [127.0.0.1] ([127.0.0.1]) (port 7027) (Abaca EPG outproxy filter 3.1.1.9347 $Rev: 9262 $) id iz6Ur92bneF0; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:14:41 -0800
Received: from xpasc.com (egate.xpasc.com [10.1.2.49]) by bslepgate.xpasc.com (Postfix-out) with ESMTP id AB818101834; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:14:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from egate.xpasc.com (egate.xpasc.com [10.1.2.49]) by xpasc.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1BNEeNH018067; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:14:40 -0800
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:14:40 -0800
From: David Morris <dwm@xpasc.com>
To: Aaron Williamson <aaron@copiesofcopies.org>
Subject: Re: draft-housley-tls-authz-extns-07.txt to Proposed Standard
In-Reply-To: <49933883.5050501@copiesofcopies.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0902111513160.31861@egate.xpasc.com>
References: <73E1DD05-C75B-47F5-92C5-21780818C0F7@colt.net> <01N5DDS79IA800007A@mauve.mrochek.com> <49933883.5050501@copiesofcopies.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
X-Propel-ID: iz6Ur92bneF0
Cc: ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 23:14:38 -0000

On Wed, 11 Feb 2009, Aaron Williamson wrote:

> ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com wrote:
>> I completely disagree with this assessment. The points you mention are quite
>> specifically talking about Agreements, not certificates.
>
> Yes, this is obviously right, "Agreements" are not certificates.  But I don't
> think it's clear that storing Agreements covers only "a fairly specific set of

Hmmmm, my interpretation would be that a certificate is in fact 
documentation of an agreement between the CA and the owner/user of the 
cert. I see no distinction between 'agreements' and 'certificates' in this 
context.

David Morris

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status