#81: OIDs and IANA Considerations Changes (by [email protected]):
* status: closed => reopened * resolution: fixed => * milestone: review => Comment: On the list discussion about this ticket, Melinda noted that, regardless of which OID arc we use, we will need to "add an OID section to the IANA considerations". We haven't done that yet, which is my first reason for reopening this ticket. My second reason... Once we've addressed ticket #10 (and #104), 6962-bis will no longer be using any of the OIDs from RFC6962. So there's no particular reason to continue to use the Google OID arc for any of the 6962-bis OIDs. Previously, Russ advised that "If new OIDs are needed, we ought to assign them from an IETF arc managed by IANA", but the consensus seemed to be that we don't have to do this if we don't want to. My preference would be to switch to using a "shorter" OID arc, to reduce the amount of "bloat" that CT adds to certificates and OCSP responses. We could save 6 or 7 bytes per OID by switching from the Google arc to a 1.3.<n> arc. -- -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: | Owner: draft-ietf-trans- [email protected] | [email protected] Type: defect | Status: reopened Priority: major | Milestone: Component: rfc6962-bis | Version: Severity: - | Resolution: Keywords: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/81#comment:3> trans <http://tools.ietf.org/trans/> _______________________________________________ Trans mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
