In message <1479993631.8937.91.ca...@infradead.org> on Thu, 24 Nov 2016 13:20:31 +0000, David Woodhouse <dw...@infradead.org> said:
dwmw2> On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 22:33 +0100, Richard Levitte wrote: dwmw2> > That being said, though, your recommendation should probably specify dwmw2> > (after discussing it) exactly what keys, certs and so on should be dwmw2> > supported. Otherwise, everyone will have a slightly different idea of dwmw2> > what's reasonable and you will end up in the same space as today... dwmw2> dwmw2> Oh $DEITY yes, that's the whole point. And I don't think I've left much dwmw2> ambiguity there. As ever, suggestions for improvement would be most dwmw2> welcome... <snip> dwmw2> http://david.woodhou.se/draft-woodhouse-cert-best-practice.html#formats dwmw2> dwmw2> 5. File formats dwmw2> dwmw2> ... ... D'oh, I feel silly now. Cheers, Richard -- Richard Levitte levi...@openssl.org OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/ -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
