Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pkix-rfc3280bis-03.txt

["David A. Cooper" <david.cooper@xxxxxxxx>]

All,

Draft 3 of 3280bis contains minor changes from draft 2.  A diff file 
highlighting the changes is available at 
http://csrc.nist.gov/pki/documents/PKIX/draft3280bis-02todraft3280bis-03_diff.html.

Draft 3 includes the following changes:

1. Section 1 now highlights the changes between 3280 and 3280bis rather 
than between
   2459 and 3280.

2. Modifications were made in sections 4.1.2.4 and 4.1.2.6 to align with
   draft-ietf-pkix-cert-utf8-03.txt.

2. Section 4.2.1.10 includes a reference to draft-ietf-pkix-srvsan-01.txt
   as an example of another document that specifies rules for name 
constraints.

3. Changes to section 4.2.1.12 were made to clarify that applications 
may require
   the presence of a specific OID in the extended key usage extension.

4. In section 4.2.1.13 the requirement for file names specified in an 
HTTP URI to
   have a ".crl" extension was removed.

5. References to PEM in sections 6 and 6.2 were removed since the text 
in section
   6.2 was incorrect and there did not seem to be a compelling reason 
to correct
   the text rather than simply removing it.

6. In section 6.1.1 item (d) and section 6.1.2 item (j), the text 
describing the source
   of trust anchor information was clarified.

7. In section 6.1.3, item (c): replaced "one" with "any".

8. The description of Figure 7 in section 6.1.3 after item (d)(3) was 
modified for clarity.

9. Section 6.3.3 item (f): Added a sentence noting that trust anchor for 
CRL certification
   path must be same as certification path for target certificate (as 
was already stated
   in the Security Considerations section).

10. Added paragraphs to Security Considerations section about the risk 
of circular
     dependencies in AIA, SIA, and CDP extensions.

11. Added paragraph to Security Considerations section about risks 
involving names with
     similar visual representations.

11. Appendix C:  Clarified that string representations of DNs follow RFC 
2253 formatting rules.

A number of spelling errors were also corrected and a few changes were 
made to correct some ID-nits.

Dave

Internet-Drafts@xxxxxxxx wrote:

> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509) Working Group of the IETF.
>
> 	Title		: Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile
> 	Author(s)	: D. Cooper, et al.
> 	Filename	: draft-ietf-pkix-rfc3280bis-03.txt
> 	Pages		: 141
> 	Date		: 2006-5-24
> 	
> This memo profiles the X.509 v3 certificate and X.509 v2 Certificate
>   Revocation List (CRL) for use in the Internet.  An overview of this
>   approach and model are provided as an introduction.  The X.509 v3
>   certificate format is described in detail, with additional
>   information regarding the format and semantics of Internet name
>   forms.  Standard certificate extensions are described and two
>   Internet-specific extensions are defined.  A set of required
>   certificate extensions is specified.  The X.509 v2 CRL format is
>   described in detail, and required extensions are defined.  An
>   algorithm for X.509 certification path validation is described.  An
>   ASN.1 module and examples are provided in the appendices.
>
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pkix-rfc3280bis-03.txt
>
>