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

Re: delta-CRLs (was Re: Last Call:draft-ietf-pkix-new-part1-06.tx t comments)

To: Ambarish Malpani <ambarish@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: delta-CRLs (was Re: Last Call:draft-ietf-pkix-new-part1-06.tx t comments)
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 22 Apr 2001 18:20:12 -0700
Cc: "'Housley, Russ'" <rhousley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, ietf-pkix@xxxxxxx
In-reply-to: Ambarish Malpani's message of "Sat, 21 Apr 2001 18:03:06 -0700"
References: <>
Reply-to: EKR <ekr@xxxxxxxx>
Sender: ekr@xxxxxxxx

Ambarish Malpani <ambarish@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Russ, the problem with this is that CAs might be unwilling to issue
> delta-CRLs because issuing a full CRL every time is too
> burdensome.
Ambarish, could you explain why the cost of issuing a full
CRL is too burdensome? Surely it's not the cost of the signature
itself you're concerned with.

-Ekr

References:
- RE: delta-CRLs (was Re: Last Call:draft-ietf-pkix-new-part1-06.tx tcomments)
  - From: Ambarish Malpani

Prev by Date: RE: delta-CRLs (was Re: Last Call:draft-ietf-pkix-new-part1-06.txt comments)
Next by Date: RE: delta-CRLs (was Re: Last Call:draft-ietf-pkix-new-part1-06.txt comments)
Previous by thread: RE: delta-CRLs (was Re: LastCall:draft-ietf-pkix-new-part1-06.txt comments)
Next by thread: RE: delta-CRLs (was Re: Last Call:draft-ietf-pkix-new-part1-06.tx tcomments)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread