[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: OCSP-X vs SCVP



At 12:06 PM +1100 11/10/00, Michael Zolotarev wrote:
 >
 > >  But that ain't how the world works, and
 > > that ain't how
 > > people want it to work.
 >
 > Proof, please. I want the proof.
 >

 The fact that people seem to care about this is proof enough for me...
MArk, this is really speculative thing to say... I don't buy it as an
argument, sorry.
It is not speculative. There have been people on this mailing list who have said that they want an XML-based solution. Telling them that you don't buy their opinion as an argument will tend to cause them not to contribute again, yes? At that point, the WG will reduce to those of us who are loud and repetitive. That is not a good way to produce good protocols.

Dont think it is a real issue with hosts and desktops. Dont think there is
an issue with mobile devices either. I am not saying it is a bloat, or it is
not. I just want some approx figures. Compare bare-minimum
ASNParser+OCSP_APIs with OCSP_XML_APIs ( for fairness I assume that XML
parser is present on the platform regardless, so it doesn't count).
This level of argument reduces to "the customer is usually wrong". That works in some areas, not in others. Given two protocols that could meet the same objectives, such arguments are likely to squelch input from the very people we should be listening to.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium