Frank Hecker: > Unfortunately I think that that rate is too slow. The problem is that as > we clear existing requests new requests come in, and if we don't process > existing requests fast enough then the queue of unprocessed requests > will continue to grow without limit.
Reading the above one might get the impression that the public comments period is the bottleneck here ;-) > > Instead of artificially throttling the rate at which we process > requests, I'd rather take CAs into public discussion as soon as we have > sufficient information to do so. More efficient would be to queue them up in a way that there are no prolonged periods without a CA in the comments period (as it usually happens) but no more than one CA at the same stage. I think the most there should be one CA in the first round and another CA already in the second round. That would give you potentially every week another CA (52 per year), far more than there are requests. > In practice some CA requests will be > relatively straightforward to evaluate, and some will be more > complicated. If you or anyone else feel that we need more time to > discuss a particular request, just tell me and I will extend the public > discussion period for that request as needed. It's the time to discuss, which is obviously extended once there is a potential issue, it's the time one needs to review. -- Regards Signer: Eddy Nigg, StartCom Ltd. Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: https://blog.startcom.org _______________________________________________ dev-tech-crypto mailing list dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
