Re: [pkix] Optimizing OCSP - Time for some spec work ?

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Fri, 25 October 2019 19:20 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: pkix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pkix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDEA512084B for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 12:20:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F_O_2L2Xi0gn for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 12:20:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBC3212088C for <pkix@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 12:20:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D610300B1E for <pkix@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 15:20:24 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net
Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 1J1ZPO2TOOLI for <pkix@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 15:20:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from a860b60074bd.fios-router.home (unknown [138.88.156.37]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E515D30021A; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 15:20:22 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <1178303845.438310.1571969542913@mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 15:20:23 -0400
Cc: IETF PKIX <pkix@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F13602BA-E85D-4F05-A7D6-7B2D7C01BA59@vigilsec.com>
References: <31256d2d-dcfb-85f7-3850-accb2b2d6b89@openca.org> <a0c0ef7c-7415-e078-a49d-d0908c6c898c@free.fr> <1178303845.438310.1571969542913@mail.yahoo.com>
To: "tejohnson@yahoo.com" <tejohnson@yahoo.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pkix/oYTWlLfAprVH7-Au6_rEAu4Z6uw>
Subject: Re: [pkix] Optimizing OCSP - Time for some spec work ?
X-BeenThere: pkix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: PKIX Working Group <pkix.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pkix>, <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pkix/>
List-Post: <mailto:pkix@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix>, <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 19:20:28 -0000

Todd E. Johnson <tejohnson=40yahoo.com@dmarc.ietf.org> writes:

> FWIW, RFC 5055 implementations are quite rare

It simply too us too long to proguce SCVP.  We missed the window on that one...

Russ