Subject: Re: [Trans] [trans] #31 (rfc6962-bis): incremental deployment and client behavior

From: "trans issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 11:38:06 -0000

#31: incremental deployment and client behavior

Comment (by [email-masked]):

 (1) The current wording implies specifying client behaviour. As we do not
 intend to specify it, we should reword it to say that a certificate not
 accompanied by an SCT MUST NOT be considered CT compliant (as one of the
 situations the client could encounter).
 (2) Then there's no mandated hard-fail and the issue around incremental
 deployment is moot - the client can decide when, and for which
 certificates, it requires CT compliance.

 Bottom line: Reword to remove the hard requirement and include this
 situation in the list of situations a client could encounter.

-- 
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:               |       Owner:  draft-ietf-trans-
  [email-masked]           |  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect       |      Status:  new
 Priority:  critical     |   Milestone:
Component:  rfc6962-bis  |     Version:
 Severity:  -            |  Resolution:
 Keywords:               |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/31#comment:1>
trans <http://tools.ietf.org/trans/>

---

From: "trans issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 14:56:14 -0000

Changes (by [email-masked]):

 * owner:  [email-masked] => [email-masked]

Comment:

 This is out for review:
 https://github.com/google/certificate-transparency-rfcs/pull/12

-- 
--------------------------+-------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]  |       Owner:  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect        |      Status:  new
 Priority:  critical      |   Milestone:
Component:  rfc6962-bis   |     Version:
 Severity:  -             |  Resolution:
 Keywords:                |
--------------------------+-------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/31#comment:2>
trans <http://tools.ietf.org/trans/>

---

From: "trans issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 12:43:11 -0000

Committed as https://github.com/google/certificate-transparency-
 rfcs/commit/075ef0338f7d9e989a6a54027ca5c457e2586e9b
 Leaving ticket open as a reminder to include this situation when listing
 situations a client may encounter.

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/31#comment:3>
trans <http://tools.ietf.org/trans/>