Re: [Trans] [trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needs to define top-level extension syntax
Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> Mon, 06 July 2015 18:34 UTC
Return-Path: <kent@bbn.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 7D0181B2F84 for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 11:34:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 sQCS0czgLMNT for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 11:34:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.bbn.com (smtp.bbn.com [128.33.0.80]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D1371B2F26 for <trans@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 11:34:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ssh.bbn.com ([192.1.122.15]:59144 helo=COMSEC-2.home) by smtp.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <kent@bbn.com>) id 1ZCBDU-000In9-LG for trans@ietf.org; Mon, 06 Jul 2015 14:34:08 -0400
Message-ID: <559ACA20.6000806@bbn.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2015 14:34:08 -0400
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: trans@ietf.org
References: <052.ecfc9a319e455c61897ed3e82e509b78@tools.ietf.org> <067.1d7ff2839592524f118803e277a8d6d6@tools.ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <067.1d7ff2839592524f118803e277a8d6d6@tools.ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/tZy8lM2IHF3AMJyFPejTsd9qH2o>
Subject: Re: [Trans] [trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needs to define top-level extension syntax
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: <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: Mon, 06 Jul 2015 18:34:10 -0000
without a top-level format for SCT extensions, the current spec is incomplete, i.e., it includes a named data structure with no spec for the content of the structure. I'll send some suggested text. > #70: STH spec needs to define top-level extension syntax > > > Comment (bybenl@google.com): > > It was our view that we did not need to specify the format until the first > extension was defined. > > However, happy to consider proposed text. >
- [Trans] [trans] #70 (client-behavior): STH spec n… trans issue tracker
- Re: [Trans] [trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec n… trans issue tracker
- Re: [Trans] [trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec n… Stephen Kent
- Re: [Trans] [trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec n… trans issue tracker
- Re: [Trans] [trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec n… Stephen Kent
- Re: [Trans] [trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec n… trans issue tracker
- Re: [Trans] [trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): SCT spec n… trans issue tracker
- Re: [Trans] [trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): SCT spec n… trans issue tracker