<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
On 07/23/2012 07:55 PM, From Rick Andrews:
<blockquote
cite="mid:544B0DD62A64C1448B2DA253C0114146068C00F0F4@TUS1XCHEVSPIN33.SYMC.SYMANTEC.COM"
type="cite">
This gives me another reason to vote against this proposal - it
doesn't include that statement. If that is your intent (eliminate
the use of CRL-based OCSP responders) or if that is the practical
effect of your proposal, I believe it should be spelled out
clearly in the proposal for all to see and understand.</blockquote>
<br>
I think it's absolutely not relevant how or on what (technically)
the OCSP response is based as long as the response is correct. It
can be a combination of different DBs or lists. We would vote
against it if it explicitly states that a CRL can not be used.<br>
<br>
I believe the internal technical workings of such a responder has
nothing lost in the guidelines. You may set a policy what it should
do under which circumstances, but that's it.<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2">Regards </td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2"> </td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Signer: </td>
<td>Eddy Nigg, COO/CTO</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td> </td>
<td><a href="http://www.startcom.org">StartCom Ltd.</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>XMPP: </td>
<td><a href="xmpp:startcom@startcom.org">startcom@startcom.org</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Blog: </td>
<td><a href="http://blog.startcom.org">Join the Revolution!</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Twitter: </td>
<td><a href="http://twitter.com/eddy_nigg">Follow Me</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>