RE: Updating RFC 3039 - and its impact on PI

["Roberto Opazo Gazmuri" <roberto@xxxxxxxx>]

> > Finally I believe that a revision of RFC 3039 should include
> > considerations to avoid the need for a PI extension according to the PI
> > draft.
> >
> > I can't see that the PI draft accomplish anything that RFC 3039 doesn't
> > already solve, or at least would solve after revision.
>
> The revised document will not be able to solve what the PI document covers
> since the PI document applies to *any entity* whereas the revised RFC 3039
> document is planned to apply only to *personal ID certificates*. Maybe the
> revised RFC 3039 could take advantage and refer to the PI document.
>

I agree.

The PI purpose is important enough to be in an independent discussion and
RFC, even considering than QC could be modified to apply to any entity.

Best regards,

Roberto