IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Trans] Alternate formats for Precertificates

Rob Stradling <rob.stradling@comodo.com> Thu, 27 February 2014 15:47 UTC

Return-Path: <rob.stradling@comodo.com>
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 BB1BB1A031B for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 07:47:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.609
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.609 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 LJGjQkHm4g8x for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 07:46:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ian.brad.office.comodo.net (eth5.brad-fw.brad.office.ccanet.co.uk [178.255.87.226]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCB4B1A0323 for <trans@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 07:46:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 12649 invoked by uid 1000); 27 Feb 2014 15:46:53 -0000
Received: from nigel.brad.office.comodo.net (HELO [192.168.0.58]) (192.168.0.58) (smtp-auth username rob, mechanism plain) by ian.brad.office.comodo.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPSA; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:46:53 +0000
Message-ID: <530F5DED.1090905@comodo.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:46:53 +0000
From: Rob Stradling <rob.stradling@comodo.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, Carl Wallace <carl@redhoundsoftware.com>
References: <CABrd9SSOmEgbTvLNw5bPN2SnKbob800qEecn+tHvZUkrghFcQg@mail.gmail.com> <530E100A.7040503@primekey.se> <530E142A.90007@comodo.com> <530E16CD.6030908@primekey.se> <CABrd9SR1S7Fg5Xs_dkgou3HfF4O_hyzFxW4qS=-2eti7DmGZew@mail.gmail.com> <67380B58-5D8B-4B38-B20B-2FF6769FE94B@vpnc.org> <CF3388E0.11D87%carl@redhoundsoftware.com> <2CABE0AE-46C1-4D7A-BD8F-29BFE6225D3A@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <2CABE0AE-46C1-4D7A-BD8F-29BFE6225D3A@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/RIVi9k69T25on8qEThv5KtgngZU
Cc: Ben Laurie <benl@google.com>, "trans@ietf.org" <trans@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Trans] Alternate formats for Precertificates
X-BeenThere: trans@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:47:00 -0000

On 26/02/14 17:12, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On Feb 26, 2014, at 9:05 AM, Carl Wallace <carl@redhoundsoftware.com> wrote:
<snip>
>> If this is all that is sought, why not just use TBSCertificate as Rob
>> suggested and be done?  How would that run afoul of ritual compliance?
>
> Because I couldn't figure out what he meant, and he followed by a smilely so I figured it wasn't serious.

Paul, sorry for being unclear.

I was simply trying to point out that reusing a structure from RFC4210 
and reusing a structure from RFC5280 are both equivalent in terms of 
structure reuse and feel-good factor.

(Tomas seemed to be implying that RFC4210 scored higher on these metrics).

> When you say "just use a TBSCertificate", you mean that CT use that instead of a certificate structure, yes?

-- 
Rob Stradling
Senior Research & Development Scientist
COMODO - Creating Trust Online

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status