Re: X.509 v3 support

My only point was that you didn't have to inform all the X.500 DSA vendors or
the DUA vendors. If it is an e-mail name that appears in a certificate, only
PEM or PEM/MIME really has to be able to generate and interpret it at this
stage.


Actually, it would be better to use one of the email address attributes that
have already been defined as part of the Internet white pages project.

                                Ned

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: X.509 v3 support, Wolfgang Schneider Re: X.509 v3 support, Ned Freed Re: X.509 v3 support, Jueneman Re: X.509 v3 support, Mark Wahl Re: X.509 v3 support, Jueneman Re: X.509 v3 support, Ned Freed Re: X.509 v3 support, Mark Wahl Re: X.509 v3 support, Jueneman Re: X.509 v3 support, Ned Freed <= Re: X.509 v3 support, Jueneman Re: X.509 v3 support, warwick (w.s.) ford Re: X.509 v3 support, Peter Williams Re: X.509 v3 support, Ned Freed Re: X.509 v3 support, Peter Williams Re: X.509 v3 support, Ned Freed Re: X.509 v3 support, Peter Williams Re: X.509 v3 support, Ned Freed Re: X.509 v3 support, Peter Williams Re: X.509 v3 support, warwick (w.s.) ford

Previous by Date:	Re: RIPEM/PEM/PGP compatibility, Ned Freed
Next by Date:	Re: Are we a standards committee?, Jueneman
Previous by Thread:	Re: X.509 v3 support, Jueneman
Next by Thread:	Re: X.509 v3 support, Jueneman
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]