Marcos Caceres wrote: > Hi Sean, > On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 11:37 PM, Sean Mullan <Sean.Mullan@sun.com> wrote: >> Marcos Caceres wrote: >>> However, do you think we should be referencing version 4? has there >>> been much uptake of v4? >> Not sure, but I would be more inclined to reference RFC 5280: >> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5280.txt > > Ok, I've updated the reference. It now reads: > [X.509v3] > Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate > Revocation List (CRL) Profile. D. Cooper, S. Santesson, S. Boeyen, R. > Housley, and W. Polk. May 2008. RFC5280 is available at > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5280.txt > > For our record keeping of LC comments, could you please confirm that > the Working Group has addressed your comments. Yes, confirmed. > > Thank you again for taking the time to do the review. You're welcome. --SeanReceived on Thursday, 26 June 2008 12:47:26 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:42:58 GMT