[cabfpub] Profiling OCSP & CRLs

Ryan Sleevi sleevi at google.com
Mon May 8 23:51:55 UTC 2017

I think 30 days is what we should target as the upper-bound, so would that
be suggesting that we should target 15 days as a SHOULD with 30 as a MUST?

Or were you suggesting 30 as a SHOULD, 45 as a MUST, which in practice
means... well, 45? :)

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Curt Spann <cspann at apple.com> wrote:

> Hi Ryan,
> Regarding delegated OCSP responder certificate validity, if 30 days is a
> desired goal (or a similar timeframe), I would recommend 45 days to allow
> the renewal to occur every 30 days, with a 15 day buffer for operational
> issues. Basically, for whatever target validity period we should add some
> buffer time.
> Cheers,
> Curt
> On Apr 25, 2017, at 4:53 PM, Ryan Sleevi via Public <public at cabforum.org>
> wrote:
> Hi folks,
> In response to various investigations about OCSP performance, operation,
> and trying to figure out how we can move to a world of more ubiquitous OCSP
> stapling, one of the things that comes up is that OCSP responses are very
> much like the pre-BR wild-west of certificates.
> I've tried to capture a starting point for discussion at
> https://github.com/sleevi/cabforum-docs/pull/2/files?diff=split . I've
> tried to annotate the changes, and the reason for the changes, so that
> people can understand them, their goals, and the implications.
> While I'd like to get this to the point of a Ballot, it's not quite there
> yet. In particular, it doesn't state Effective Dates, because I want to get
> a sense of the challenges that each bit may pose :)
> If people find this approach useful, I'd like to also reform the CRL
> profile in a similar fashion.
> There's also a lot of ways to express these requirements. I considered
> using a table approach, which I suspect some of our ETSI-audited CA members
> will be familiar with, and which I find useful, but I thought it best to
> keep the initial discussions simple and textual, and then we can make it
> pretty once we're happy with the substance.
> _______________________________________________
> Public mailing list
> Public at cabforum.org
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20170508/89d89a80/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Public mailing list