I read both drafts and oppose adoption. I think Dennis'
draft contains good arguments against doing this, and
separately, I think we'd be better off devoting effort
towards efforts that go beyond, rather than fiddle-with,
X.509, so that there's some chance of not needing 50
year old X.509 code in
I support adoption. Cross-signing has proven a clumsy tool for managing the
introduction of new roots, and we need something better.
Mike
On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 11:01 AM Joseph Salowey wrote:
> At the trust tussle Interim in October we had consensus that the working
> group was interested in
I support adoption. As our PKIs change, we need mechanisms to allow servers to
move forward, while maintaining widespread compatibility. While currently
available mechanisms (eg cross signing) can help in some circumstances, they
are not sufficient.
Trust negotiation has unique challenges, and
On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 6:21 AM Kampanakis, Panos wrote:
> Thx Luke, Bas.
>
>
>
> Resurrecting this old thread regarding web connection data sizes to share
> some more data I presented at a conference last week. You two know about
> this, but I thought it could benefit future group discussions.
>
