Good point. Posted a PR: https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/385
On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 6:03 PM, Jörn Heissler <acme-sp...@joern.heissler.de> wrote: > Hello, > > https://ietf-wg-acme.github.io/acme/draft-ietf-acme-acme. > html#rfc.section.7.6 > states: > > If this field is not set the server SHOULD use the unspecified (0) > reasonCode value when generating OCSP responses and CRLs. > > Yet https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5280#section-5.3.1 says the opposite: > > the reason code CRL entry extension SHOULD be absent instead > of using the unspecified (0) reasonCode value. > > Could this be reworded somehow? It would make sense to store `0' in a > database but later don't add a CRLReason extension / ASN.1 field. > > Cheers, > Jörn > > _______________________________________________ > Acme mailing list > Acme@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme > >
_______________________________________________ Acme mailing list Acme@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
