Subject: OCSP in TLS handshake

From: Marc Branchaud <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 10:51:11 -0800

Deacon, Alex wrote:
> 
> As for the nonceUnsupported proposal, it does have it merits. However
> I have to agree with Ryan by objecting to its standardization in v1
> for two reasons.  First, doing so will not allow for the "TLS 
> Extension" use case where OCSP responses are included in protocol 
> exchanges.

I'm not trying to be obtuse here (it actually takes very little effort), 
but I really need a patient explanation of why nonceUnsupported 
precludes the use of OCSP responses in the TLS handshake.

		M.

---

From: Marc Branchaud <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 15:58:32 -0800

> precludes the use of OCSP responses in the TLS handshake.

OK, I'd settle for an impatient explanation...

		M.