- From: Hal Lockhart <hlockhar@bea.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 06:36:27 -0700
- To: "Marcos Caceres" <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
- Cc: <olli.immonen@nokia.com>, <public-appformats@w3.org>, <member-xmlsec-maintwg-request@w3.org>
That seems excellent. Hal > -----Original Message----- > From: Marcos Caceres [mailto:marcosscaceres@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 8:04 PM > To: Hal Lockhart > Cc: olli.immonen@nokia.com; public-appformats@w3.org; member-xmlsec- > maintwg-request@w3.org > Subject: Re: [widgets-digsig] Comment on use of X.509 v3 > > > Since this is not well understood and the document is not generally > > accessible, you might want to repeat the above in your document. In > > fact, I would suggest changing it to say: > > > > Implementations MUST be prepared to accept any version certificate. > > The spec now reads: > "Implementations must be prepared to accept all X.509 certificates > versions identified in [X509v3] via the version field. To be clear, > the value of the version field identifies the version of an X.509 > certificate in the following way: > 0 is X.509 version 1, > 1 is X.509 version 2, > 2 is X.509 version 3, > if the version field is omitted, then treat the certificate as X.509 > version 1." > > Please let me know if that is clear enough. > > Kind regards, > Marcos > > -- > Marcos Caceres > http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Thursday, 3 April 2008 13:37:43 UTC