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

Re: Bug in RFC 2459

To: pgut001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Bug in RFC 2459
From: Stephen Kent <kent@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 09:46:56 -0500
Cc: ietf-pkix@xxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-pkix/mail-archive/>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-pkix-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
Sender: owner-ietf-pkix@xxxxxxx

Peter,

Not to be too picky, but what you described is not a bug just becuase a
spec changed from draft to RFC. Only if the change was inadvertant would it
qualify as a bug.  Perhaps the editors of Part 1 can comment on the
motivation for the change.

Steve

References:
- Bug in RFC 2459
  - From: Peter Gutmann

Prev by Date: RE: CMC Comments?
Next by Date: Re: Usage of CRL Issuing Distribution Point
Previous by thread: Bug in RFC 2459
Next by thread: RE: Bug in RFC 2459
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread