trans  

Messages by Thread

• • Re: [Trans] [ct-policy] Re: Certificate Transparency Newsletter - August 2015 Jeremy Rowley
  • Re: [Trans] [ct-policy] Re: Certificate Transparency Newsletter - August 2015 Tom Ritter
  • Re: [Trans] [ct-policy] Re: Certificate Transparency Newsletter - August 2015 Melinda Shore
• [Trans] [trans] #103 (gossip): Evaluate if we need tighter requirements around STHs when we take into account multiple logs. trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #103 (gossip): Evaluate if we need tighter requirements around STHs when we take into account multiple logs. trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #103 (gossip): Evaluate if we need tighter requirements around STHs when we take into account multiple logs. trans issue tracker
• [Trans] Gossip draft CFA closed Melinda Shore
  • Re: [Trans] Gossip draft CFA closed Bryan Ford
  • Re: [Trans] Gossip draft CFA closed Tom Ritter
  • Re: [Trans] Gossip draft CFA closed Bryan Ford
• [Trans] [trans] #102 (rfc6962-bis): "root" should be "trust anchor" trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #102 (rfc6962-bis): "root" should be "trust anchor" trans issue tracker
• [Trans] [trans] #101 (gossip): Handle Shutdown Log Case trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #101 (gossip): Handle Shutdown Log Case trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #101 (gossip): Handle Shutdown Log Case trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #101 (gossip): Handle Shutdown Log Case trans issue tracker
• [Trans] [trans] #100 (gossip): Review in light of blocking trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #100 (gossip): Review in light of blocking trans issue tracker
• [Trans] TRANS Draft minutes for IETF-93 Salz, Rich
  • Re: [Trans] TRANS Draft minutes for IETF-93 Melinda Shore
  • Re: [Trans] TRANS Draft minutes for IETF-93 Daniel Kahn Gillmor
  • Re: [Trans] TRANS Draft minutes for IETF-93 Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] TRANS Draft minutes for IETF-93 Salz, Rich
  • Re: [Trans] TRANS Draft minutes for IETF-93 Paul Wouters
• [Trans] [trans] #99 (rfc6962-bis): Clearer definition of when a certificate is CT-compliant needed trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #99 (rfc6962-bis): Clearer definition of when a certificate is CT-compliant needed trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #99 (rfc6962-bis): Clearer definition of when a certificate is CT-compliant needed Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #99 (rfc6962-bis): Clearer definition of when a certificate is CT-compliant needed trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #99 (rfc6962-bis): Clearer definition of when a certificate is CT-compliant needed trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #99 (rfc6962-bis): Clearer definition of when a certificate is CT-compliant needed trans issue tracker
• [Trans] [trans] #98 (gossip): Update gossip-ct for 6962bis trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #98 (gossip): Update gossip-ct for 6962bis trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #98 (gossip): Update gossip-ct for 6962bis trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #98 (gossip): Update gossip-ct for 6962bis trans issue tracker
• [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Melinda Shore
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Salz, Rich
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Eran Messeri
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Dmitry Belyavsky
  • [Trans] Fwd: Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Melinda Shore
  • Re: [Trans] Fwd: Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Salz, Rich
  • Re: [Trans] Fwd: Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Leif Johansson
  • Re: [Trans] Fwd: Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Tim Wicinski
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Karen Seo
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Bryan Ford
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Ben Laurie
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Tom Ritter
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Bryan Ford
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Tom Ritter
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Bryan Ford
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Rob Stradling
  • [Trans] CT "Lite" idea (was Re: Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct) Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Bryan Ford
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Tom Ritter
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Ben Laurie
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Bryan Ford
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Ben Laurie
  • Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct Bryan Ford
• [Trans] [trans] #97 (rfc6962-bis): Allocate an OID for CMS precertificates trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #97 (rfc6962-bis): Allocate an OID for CMS precertificates trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #97 (rfc6962-bis): Allocate an OID for CMS precertificates Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #97 (rfc6962-bis): Allocate an OID for CMS precertificates Rick Andrews
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #97 (rfc6962-bis): Allocate an OID for CMS precertificates Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #97 (rfc6962-bis): Allocate an OID for CMS precertificates trans issue tracker
• Re: [Trans] Review of draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct-02 Linus Nordberg
  • Re: [Trans] Review of draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct-02 Ben Laurie
  • Re: [Trans] Review of draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct-02 Tom Ritter
  • Re: [Trans] Review of draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct-02 Tom Ritter
• [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic? trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic? trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic? Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic? Ben Laurie
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic? Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic? Ben Laurie
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic? trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #96 (rfc6962-bis): Metadata: Should it be dynamic? trans issue tracker
• [Trans] [trans] #95 (client-behavior): The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata Daniel Kahn Gillmor
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): Should the response size to get-entries be a part of the log metadata? (was: The response size to get-entries should be a part of the log metadata) trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #95 (rfc6962-bis): Should the response size to get-entries be a part of the log metadata? trans issue tracker
• [Trans] [trans] #94 (client-behavior): Fetching of inclusion proofs: Why and when are clients expected to do this? trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #94 (rfc6962-bis): Fetching of inclusion proofs: Why and when are clients expected to do this? trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #94 (rfc6962-bis): Fetching of inclusion proofs: Why and when are clients expected to do this? Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #94 (rfc6962-bis): Fetching of inclusion proofs: Why and when are clients expected to do this? Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #94 (rfc6962-bis): Fetching of inclusion proofs: Why and when are clients expected to do this? trans issue tracker
• [Trans] [trans] #93 (client-behavior): Monitor description: Inconsistency between intro and section 5.4 trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #93 (client-behavior): Monitor description: Inconsistency between intro and section 5.4 trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #93 (client-behavior): Monitor description: Inconsistency between intro and section 5.4 Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #93 (rfc6962-bis): Monitor description: Inconsistency between intro and section 5.4 trans issue tracker
• Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH specneedstodefinetop-levelextension syntax Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH specneedstodefinetop-levelextension syntax Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STHspecneedstodefinetop-levelextension syntax Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STHspecneedstodefinetop-levelextension syntax Stephen Kent
• Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needs to define top-level extension syntax Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needs to define top-levelextension syntax Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needs to define top-levelextension syntax Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needs to definetop-levelextension syntax Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needs to definetop-levelextension syntax Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needs todefinetop-levelextension syntax Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needs todefinetop-levelextension syntax Melinda Shore
  • Re: [Trans] #70 (rfc6962-bis): STH spec needstodefinetop-levelextension syntax Rob Stradling
• [Trans] Long-term: scalable collective signing (of certs, log-heads, and/or SCTs) Bryan Ford
  • Re: [Trans] Long-term: scalable collective signing (of certs, log-heads, and/or SCTs) Eran Messeri
  • Re: [Trans] Long-term: scalable collective signing (of certs, log-heads, and/or SCTs) Katriel Cohn-Gordon
  • Re: [Trans] Long-term: scalable collective signing (of certs, log-heads, and/or SCTs) Tom Ritter
  • Re: [Trans] Long-term: scalable collective signing (of certs, log-heads, and/or SCTs) Bryan Ford
  • Re: [Trans] Long-term: scalable collective signing (of certs, log-heads, and/or SCTs) Tom Ritter
  • Re: [Trans] Long-term: scalable collective signing (of certs, log-heads, and/or SCTs) Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] Long-term: scalable collective signing (of certs, log-heads, and/or SCTs) Bryan Ford
• [Trans] [[email protected]] New Version Notification for draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct-02.txt Linus Nordberg
• [Trans] I-D Action: draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis-08.txt internet-drafts
• [Trans] Remote presentation at Prague meeting Melinda Shore
• [Trans] I-D Action: draft-ietf-trans-threat-analysis-01.txt internet-drafts
  • [Trans] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-trans-threat-analysis-01.txt Melinda Shore
  • Re: [Trans] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-trans-threat-analysis-01.txt Stephen Kent
• [Trans] clarification on scope of 6962-bis Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] clarification on scope of 6962-bis Melinda Shore
• [Trans] [trans] #92 (rfc6962-bis): get-entries needs to return the whole X509ChainEntry trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #92 (rfc6962-bis): get-entries needs to return the whole X509ChainEntry trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #92 (rfc6962-bis): get-entries needs to return the whole X509ChainEntry trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #92 (rfc6962-bis): get-entries needs to return the whole X509ChainEntry trans issue tracker
• [Trans] [trans] #91 (client-behavior): Clarify encoding of fields in the log client messages trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #91 (rfc6962-bis): Clarify encoding of fields in the log client messages trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #91 (rfc6962-bis): Clarify encoding of fields in the log client messages trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #91 (rfc6962-bis): Clarify encoding of fields in the log client messages trans issue tracker
• [Trans] Verifying inclusion proof Ondrej Mikle
  • Re: [Trans] Verifying inclusion proof Adam Eijdenberg
  • Re: [Trans] Verifying inclusion proof Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] Verifying inclusion proof Matt Palmer
  • Re: [Trans] Verifying inclusion proof Matt Palmer
  • Re: [Trans] Verifying inclusion proof Ben Laurie
  • Re: [Trans] Verifying inclusion proof Matt Palmer
  • Re: [Trans] Verifying inclusion proof Ondrej Mikle
  • Re: [Trans] Verifying inclusion proof Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] Verifying inclusion proof Phillip Hallam-Baker
• [Trans] [trans] #90 (rfc6962-bis): Clarify how to turn a MerkleTreeLeaf into a leaf hash trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #90 (rfc6962-bis): Clarify how to turn a MerkleTreeLeaf into a leaf hash trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #90 (rfc6962-bis): Clarify how to turn a MerkleTreeLeaf into a leaf hash trans issue tracker
• Re: [Trans] direction for article Melinda Shore
• [Trans] [trans] #89 (rfc6962-bis): get-entries: "end" greater than "tree_size" should be allowed trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #89 (rfc6962-bis): get-entries: "end" greater than "tree_size" should be allowed trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #89 (rfc6962-bis): get-entries: "end" greater than "tree_size" should be allowed trans issue tracker
• [Trans] [trans] #88 (client-behavior): get-entries: "end" should be greater-than-or-equal to "start" trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #88 (rfc6962-bis): get-entries: "end" should be greater-than-or-equal to "start" trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #88 (rfc6962-bis): get-entries: "end" should be greater-than-or-equal to "start" trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #88 (rfc6962-bis): get-entries: "end" should be greater-than-or-equal to "start" trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #88 (rfc6962-bis): get-entries: "end" should be greater-than-or-equal to "start" trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #88 (rfc6962-bis): get-entries: "end" should be greater-than-or-equal to "start" trans issue tracker
• [Trans] Log Monitoring API Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Matt Palmer
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Hugo Maxwell Connery
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Matt Palmer
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Jeremy Rowley
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Hugo Maxwell Connery
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Jeremy Rowley
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Jeremy Rowley
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Matt Palmer
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Andrew Ayer
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Zakir Durumeric
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Jeremy Rowley
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Clint Wilson
  • Re: [Trans] Log Monitoring API Matt Palmer
• Re: [Trans] Format of SCTs Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] Format of SCTs Matt Palmer
• [Trans] [trans] #87 (rfc6962-bis): Add reference to threat analysis document trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #87 (rfc6962-bis): Add reference to threat analysis document trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #87 (rfc6962-bis): Add reference to threat analysis document trans issue tracker
• [Trans] [trans] #86 (rfc6962-bis): SCTs should be returned in final format trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #86 (rfc6962-bis): SCTs should be returned in final format Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #86 (rfc6962-bis): SCTs should be returned in final format trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #86 (rfc6962-bis): SCTs should be returned in final format trans issue tracker
• Re: [Trans] [trans] #41 (rfc6962-bis): missing threat model and security analysis trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #41 (rfc6962-bis): missing threat model and security analysis trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #41 (rfc6962-bis): missing threat model and security analysis trans issue tracker
• [Trans] [trans] #85 (rfc6962-bis): Precertificate CMS structures MUST be DER trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #85 (rfc6962-bis): Precertificate CMS structures MUST be DER trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #85 (rfc6962-bis): Precertificate CMS structures MUST be DER Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #85 (rfc6962-bis): Precertificate CMS structures MUST be DER trans issue tracker
  • Re: [Trans] [trans] #85 (rfc6962-bis): Precertificate CMS structures MUST be DER trans issue tracker
• [Trans] I-D Action: draft-ietf-trans-threat-analysis-00.txt internet-drafts
  • [Trans] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-trans-threat-analysis-00.txt Melinda Shore
  • Re: [Trans] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-trans-threat-analysis-00.txt Rick Andrews
  • Re: [Trans] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-trans-threat-analysis-00.txt Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-trans-threat-analysis-00.txt Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-trans-threat-analysis-00.txt Rob Stradling
  • Re: [Trans] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-trans-threat-analysis-00.txt Stephen Kent
  • Re: [Trans] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-trans-threat-analysis-00.txt Rob Stradling

• Earlier messages
• Later messages