[caops-wg] OCSP - fault tolerance

[Jesus Luna]

Mike Helm wrote:

>Olle Mulmo writes:
>  
>
>>bit minimalistic. A new section 5.x sounds like a good plan, although I 
>>think the text below is not intended for all kinds of responders but 
>>rather that of root CAs and transponders/global redirectors?
>>    
>>
>
>I think you're rite -- let me think about this additional type.
>  
>
We have been reading the document and maybe it should be a good idea to 
move topics referring to Fault Tolerance and Key Protection to section 
"8. Security considerations", because in that way we can separate OCSP's 
functional requirements from security requirements thus easing its 
adoption to our intended audience.

-- 

____________________
Jesus Luna Garcia
PhD Student. Polytechnic University of Catalonia
Barcelona, Spain
jluna at ac.upc.edu