Roger Fajman wrote:
Don't you think that fifty years is enough time to upgrade all
certificate
implenetations?
Sure, but a lot of people thought that they didn't have to worry about
the year 2000 because it was 25 years away. Why set deadlines sooner
than
they really need to be?
I don't think people care too much about the choice of 2050 vs 2070
vs 2090, for this rollover value but what is important is:
- implementations agree on what a given encoded date means and how
to encode a given date.
- SMIME should follow what PKIX adopts rather than define things
separately and differently.
If one really cares about the 2050 vs. 2090 issue,
one should argue it on PKIX lists:
ietf-pkix /ietf-pkix-request @tandem.com
--a.
--
Anil R. Gangolli
Structured Arts Consulting Group
mailto:gangolli(_at_)StructuredArts(_dot_)com
http://www.StructuredArts.com