RE: TSP. Version 10, Removal of SIA Extension

[Peter Sylvester <Peter.Sylvester@xxxxxxxxxx>]

The following two mails had been addressed to the editor of the
time stamping draft. This doesn't mean that other couldn't comment.

And it would be nice to read an answer from the editor, 
IMHO after some reasonable time no answer can be interpreted as 
"I don't care, you are talking non-sense."


From: Michael Zolotarev <mzolotarev@baltimore.com>
To: Peter Sylvester <Peter.Sylvester@edelweb.fr>, Denis.Pinkas@bull.net
Cc: ietf-pkix@imc.org
Subject: RE: TSP. Version 10, Removal of SIA Extension
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 09:48:57 +1000

I second the proposal.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Sylvester [mailto:Peter.Sylvester@EdelWeb.fr]
> Sent: Tuesday, 24 October 2000 3:10
> To: mzolotarev@baltimore.com; Denis.Pinkas@bull.net
> Cc: ietf-pkix@imc.org
> Subject: Re: TSP. Version 10, Removal of SIA Extension
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A TS certificate contains the an access information was a feature in
> the text, having this removed may not easily allow to get it back
> in a next round. 
> 
> I would consider to include the complete definition of SIA in the
> TS text since it is not or not yet defined anywhere else, and
> maybe mention that it is expected that it will be removed later. 
> 
> In this way the feature is described and stable, and when
> as soon as part1 gets updated and the TS text gets moved from
> proposed to draft, one can remove it without having added
> or removed any functionality. 
>  
> > Michael,
> > 
> > > Sounds like its time to get SIA back to TSS draft, Denis :)
> > 
> > "son-of-RFC2459" has not yet passed WG last call, nor IESG 
> last call.
> > Waiting for it would create a delay that could be estimated 
> to be, at best,
> > about two months and thus would mean issuing the TSP RFC 
> next year. :-(
> > 
> > We now need this long-awaited RFC. 
> > 
> > Denis
> > 
> > Note: I have just posted to the web editor an update 
> (version 11) that
> > incorporates the changes that have been noticed (plus one, 
> un-noticed in the
> > ASN1 module !)
> 


----- End Included Message -----