[cabfpub] Ballot 106 - Extended deadline to prohibit OCSP good response for non-issued certificates

[Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.)]

On 07/23/2013 09:40 PM, From Steve Roylance:
> Hi Eddy.
> Ryan is correct as the ballot carves out Name Constrained CAs and is 
> under vote already.   The 106 ballot allows grace to the non name 
> constrained entities.

Since it's your ballot I'm coming back to you...the proposed change states:

    Effective 1 August 2013, OCSP responders _for_MUST NOT_CAs which are
    not Technically Constrained in line with Section 9.7 MUST
    NOT_respond with a "good" status for such certificates.


Can you explain the rational if the ballot 106 will be accepted that 
this is still necessary and warranted? Wouldn't ballot 106 actually make 
this redundant? If not, why?


Regards
Signer: 	Eddy Nigg, COO/CTO
	StartCom Ltd. <http://www.startcom.org>
XMPP: 	startcom at startcom.org <xmpp:startcom at startcom.org>
Blog: 	Join the Revolution! <http://blog.startcom.org>
Twitter: 	Follow Me <http://twitter.com/eddy_nigg>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20130723/178c43cf/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4540 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20130723/178c43cf/attachment-0001.bin