Subject: Re: [Trans] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis-31: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

From: Rob Stradling <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 09:59:12 +0000

On 23/10/2019 16:15, Salz, Rich wrote:
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
> 
> 
>>         request without modification at a later date.  Note that as per
>          [RFC7231], in the case of a 503 response the log MAY include a
>          "Retry-After:" header in order to request a minimum time for the
>          client to wait before retrying the request.
> 
> Sorry cache-miss :)
> 
>>     Mirja is recommending that we also specify in -bis a default (and
>      completely arbitrary) waiting time, for situations where the log server
>      does not send an explicit "Retry-After" header.  Do you have a view on that?
> 
> I am opposed to this change.

There doesn't seem to be any support for a "default waiting time", so 
I've merged PR 316 and published draft -34.

-- 
Rob Stradling
Senior Research & Development Scientist
Sectigo Limited