[Trans] [trans] #102 (rfc6962-bis): "root" should be "trust anchor"
"trans issue tracker" <trac+trans@tools.ietf.org> Fri, 31 July 2015 14:47 UTC
Return-Path: <trac+trans@tools.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A8B41A896C for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 07:47:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable
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 ZgA8BAV5oLse for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 07:47:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (zinfandel.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BA641A8963 for <trans@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 07:47:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([::1]:60067 helo=zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.82_1-5b7a7c0-XX) (envelope-from <trac+trans@tools.ietf.org>) id 1ZLBao-0002El-Lz; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 07:47:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: trans issue tracker <trac+trans@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.12.5
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.5, by Edgewall Software
To: draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis@tools.ietf.org, benl@google.com
X-Trac-Project: trans
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:47:26 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/trans/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/102
Message-ID: <055.3413498b3c6ddedb48a659659f8bc47d@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 102
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis@tools.ietf.org, benl@google.com, trans@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+trans@tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Resent-To: draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis@ietf.org
Resent-Message-Id: <20150731144727.4BA641A8963@ietfa.amsl.com>
Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 07:47:27 -0700
Resent-From: trac+trans@tools.ietf.org
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/D7usI5UzWxNKowJpYbsYT3fQG6U>
Cc: trans@ietf.org
Subject: [Trans] [trans] #102 (rfc6962-bis): "root" should be "trust anchor"
X-BeenThere: trans@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
List-Id: Public Notary Transparency working group discussion list <trans.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/trans/>
List-Post: <mailto:trans@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:47:28 -0000
#102: "root" should be "trust anchor" Through the I-D we refer to root certificates, whereas the intent (and the practice) is that the "roots" actually include intermediates, too. This seems important, since browsers also include intermediates in their trust anchors. So, we need to correct the use of the term "root" throughout the document. -- -------------------------+------------------------------------------------- Reporter: | Owner: draft-ietf-trans- benl@google.com | rfc6962-bis@tools.ietf.org Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: rfc6962-bis | Version: Severity: - | Keywords: -------------------------+------------------------------------------------- Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/102> trans <http://tools.ietf.org/trans/>
- [Trans] [trans] #102 (rfc6962-bis): "root" should… trans issue tracker
- Re: [Trans] [trans] #102 (rfc6962-bis): "root" sh… trans issue tracker
- Re: [Trans] [trans] #102 (rfc6962-bis): "root" sh… trans issue tracker
- Re: [Trans] [trans] #102 (rfc6962-bis): "root" sh… trans issue tracker
- Re: [Trans] [trans] #102 (rfc6962-bis): "root" sh… trans issue tracker
- Re: [Trans] [trans] #102 (rfc6962-bis): "root" sh… trans issue tracker