Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pkix-dpv-dpd-req-01.txt

["Housley, Russ" <rhousley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Denis:

> > The structure of SCVP makes it very easy to add support of attribute
> > certificates (or PGP certificates for that matter) at a later date.
>
>We are not talking of solutions at this time, but only of requirements.
>So the question is whether we add in the requirements document some text
>to cover attribute certificates. If we do, which text ?

I raised this question in Salt Lake City.  The group did not want to 
address DPV for attribute certificates at this time.  The point that I was 
trying to make above is that the protocol design allows us to easily add 
this support in the future.

>We have not say, at this time, whether SCVP or some flavor of it, will be
>the protocol that answers to these requirements.

It is not a requirement!

Russ




============================================================================
================
This e-mail, its content and any files transmitted with it are intended
solely for the addressee(s) and are PRIVILEGED and 
CONFIDENTIAL.  Access by any other party is unauthorized without the express
prior written permission of the sender.  If 
you have received this e-mail in error you may not copy, disclose to any
third party or use the contents, attachments or 
information in any way, Please delete all copies of the e-mail and the
attachment(s), if any and notify the sender. 
Thank You.
============================================================================
================