At 7:55 AM +0900 6/1/12, Randy Bush wrote:
>...
while i agree that the change is correct, this is not an erratum, but an
actual change in semantics.
randy
yeah, sort of.
The text that was there could not be acted upon by a CA or an RP
requesting a cert. The cited field are in KU, not EKU, and were
already described in the immediately preceding paragraph. So, this
text, which is a MAY, just provides guidance (for a CA or RP re a
cert request) consistent with what is already described earlier in
this RFC.
Steve
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
