Re: RFC3280 and/or 3280bis?

On 2008-04-04 15:20:00 +0100, Stephen Farrell wrote:

>> Thanks for the heads-up.  Is there a list of changes between 3280
>> and 3280bis somewhere?
>
> There's a summary in the introduction of the draft (about p4).
>
> One nice thing we added, that's not listed there (and that
> I'd forgotten 'till I went over it today;-) is in 4.1.2.5:
>
>    To indicate that a certificate has no well defined expiration date,
>    the notAfter SHOULD be assigned the GeneralizedTime value of
>    99991231235959Z.

Gasp, a Y10K problem.  You guys are thinking of job security *far*
into the future....

-- 
Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>

Received on Friday, 4 April 2008 14:24:31 UTC