Andrew,
we had some discussion within Entegrity back in March on this whole issue -
and as we wanted to get D-H support out into the market with the Entegrity
SDP we had to make some decisions. As I'm about to go on vacation
unfortunately I've not the time to detail what we did. Hopefully some of my
colleagues who are also on the list can provide the input on what we did.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Farrell [mailto:afarrell(_at_)baltimore(_dot_)ie]
Sent: 31 July 1999 15:23
To: John Hughes
Cc: ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org; ietf-pkix(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: X9.42 and RFC2459 inconsistency?
In message <002701bedade$9c1f10138d90a(_at_)joh-laptop>you write:
We can generate D-H certificates - and we use the rfc 2459 dhpublicnumber
OID.
You mean the X9.42 oid with the pfc 2459 semantics? Do you have serious
"Permanent root for paying customer" certs using this out there? And if
so, why? :)
John
Andrew.