[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on the removal of upper bound in X.509"
Kemp, David P. wrote:
A normative upper bound has the undesirable effect of requiring
implementations to be less liberal in what they accept.
No it doesn't. An application can, if it so chooses, support
a broader profile than PKIX.
> An informative
upper bound provides guidance to CAs on maximizing interoperability,
An informative upper bound allows CAs to issue certs that won't be
accepted by implementations that enforce those upper bounds, which
hinders interop.
I would think that if there is real demand for a profile with larger,
or no, uppper bounds, then that'd be a simple I-D to write.
So, I still don't want to see 3280bis change in this respect at this
time.
S.