W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xkms@w3.org > November 2002

OCSP rqmt agreed?

From: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:18:25 -0500
Message-ID: <E320A8529CF07E4C967ECC2F380B0CF90106751B@bsebe001.americas.nokia.com>
To: <www-xkms@w3.org>

I believe from the discussion on the teleconference that we are agreed that the wording on the requirement
reqarding OCSP is acceptable.

Currently the requirement 2.5.4 [1] states that 

"The following KeyInfo formats MUST be supported: KeyName, KeyValue, and RetrievalMethod.The X509Certificate KeyInfo format MUST be supported by a trust server if the service claims interoperability with PKIX X.509. Additional KeyInfo formats such as X509Chain, OCSP, and X509CRL MAY be supported. X509Chain and OCSP MUST be defined in the XKMS specifications. X509CRL is defined in the XML Signature recommendation.The XKMS registration Private format MUST be supported if the service supports either service generated key pairs or key recovery.[List(Sebastien Pouliot)]"


In brief - support for the OCSP KeyInfo format is MAY, but the XKMS specification MUST define the OCSP format.

br, Frederick

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/XKMS/Drafts/xkms-req.html

---------------------------------------
Frederick Hirsch
Technology Architect
Nokia Mobile Phones
5 Wayside Rd., Burlington, MA 01803 USA
frederick.hirsch@nokia.com
Received on Friday, 22 November 2002 09:19:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:39:18 GMT