I was simply trying to point out that reusing a structure from RFC4210 and reusing a structure from RFC5280 are both equivalent in terms of structure reuse and feel-good factor. (Tomas seemed to be implying that RFC4210 scored higher on these metrics).
Since there is some unease on the mailing list regarding duplication of issuer/serialNumber pairs, I was merely pointing out that there is an alternative that does not affects the CT RFC in any structural way. Simply using another, already existing ASN.1 structure.
I have no problem living with the present use of TBSCertificates if everyone agrees. I'm not much of a fan of wacky ideas however, when there are standard based alternatives.
Cheers, Tomas _______________________________________________ Trans mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
