W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > April to June 2001

X509CRL discord

From: merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 16:48:27 +0100
To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
Message-Id: <20010510154827.ACEB84477D@yog-sothoth.ie.baltimore.com>

In response to producing an X.509 CRL example, I just wanted to
note that I really don't like the lack of harmony in our definition
of CRL handling within X.509 data.

Forcing the CRL to be placed in a separate X.509 data element from
the corresponding certificate material simply makes the process of
identifying association harder.

Additionally, the restriction to just a single CRL per X.509 data
makes the handling of delta CRLs very unwieldy; we wind up with a
bunch of different X.509 data, where one would be much more
straightforward.

I note that in the thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2000JulSep/0254.html
(and others) several people have argued for more flexibility with
the CRL, but I've yet to find the argument that was made against
this flexibility...

For reference, I'd like the definition to be simply

<complexType name="X509DataType">
  <sequence maxOccurs="unbounded">
    <choice>
      <element name="X509IssuerSerial" type="ds:X509IssuerSerialType"/>
      <element name="X509SKI" type="base64Binary"/>
      <element name="X509SubjectName" type="string"/>
      <element name="X509Certificate" type="base64Binary"/>
      <element name="X509CRL" type="base64Binary"/> </choice>
      <any namespace="##other" processContents="lax"/>
    </choice>
  </sequence>
</complexType>

This imposes no constraints other than our verbal ones.

Merlin

r/merlin@baltimore.ie/2001.05.10/15:25:13


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for direct,  special,  indirect 
or consequential  damages  arising  from  alteration of  the contents of this
message by a third party or as a result of any virus being passed on.

In addition, certain Marketing collateral may be added from time to time to
promote Baltimore Technologies products, services, Global e-Security or
appearance at trade shows and conferences.

This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by
Baltimore MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including
computer viruses.
   http://www.baltimore.com
Received on Thursday, 10 May 2001 11:49:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:13 GMT