Re: [security-services] Core 26

[Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie>]

Phill,

One I haven't seen raised (maybe I missed the relevant bit) is 
that -25 has two defintions of StatusCodeType: lines 1139 and
1212. The fist is declared comlpexType, the second simpleType
which I guess might even be legal, but would certainly be a
silly feature to use. I imagine that this is just some editorial
versioning stuff, in which case, no need to respond to this.

Stephen.

PS: Given the choice I'd personally dump the entire, IMO way
over-complex, status stuff from lines 1101-1199 and keep the 
19 lines from 1200-1219. 200 vs 20 lines of spec, who knows how 
many LOC, is a no-brainer for me unless status handling is a 
major customer requirement, which I don't believe is the case. 
However, that's just me:-)


"Hallam-Baker, Phillip" wrote:
> 
> The discussion on Core 25 appears to be getting to the point where it would
> be useful to release the new draft with the (many) amendments that have been
> made since.
> 
> If anyone has comments on core 25 that have not made it to the list, please
> do that now.
> 
>         Phill
> 
> Phillip Hallam-Baker FBCS C.Eng.
> Principal Scientist
> VeriSign Inc.
> pbaker@verisign.com
> 781 245 6996 x227

-- 
____________________________________________________________
Stephen Farrell         				   
Baltimore Technologies,   tel: (direct line) +353 1 881 6716
39 Parkgate Street,                     fax: +353 1 881 7000
Dublin 8.                mailto:stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie
Ireland                             http://www.baltimore.com