Subject: RE: delta-CRLs and NR

From: Santosh Chokhani <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 15:22:44 -0400

Even if you eliminate the full CRL, each delta refers to a "full CRL base".
The base may have been issues some time BC.  It does NOT matter.

BTW, a pragmatic way to issue deltas is to issue a base also periodically.

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Myers [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 3:26 PM
To: Santosh Chokhani; Tom Gindin
Cc: David P. Kemp; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: delta-CRLs and NR

I understand.  But the trajectory of the dialog seemed to be suggesting
elimination the full CRL context, hence in that forward scenario one would
have no choice but to face the accumulation task.  Also, the proposal to
enable a different period of production between a full CRL and its
associated deltas (thus enabling periods of delta-only activity between full
CRL production) does suggest that there might exists cases where more than
one delta is necessary to span the gap between fulls.

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Santosh Chokhani [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 12:11 PM
To: Michael Myers; Tom Gindin
Cc: David P. Kemp; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: delta-CRLs and NR

Mike:
You do NOT need to accumulate all the relevant deltas.  You only need the
referenced base or later and the delta in "your hand" to create a full
revocation picture.

---

From: "Michael Myers" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 12:42:02 -0700

Santosh,

I think we might be saying the same thing using different words.

Mike