RE: Question about CMP(RFC2510)

["Miguel Rodriguez" <mars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

OK let's see, I just checked draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2510bis-09.txt where
pvno is defined as follows  (section 5.1.1, page 27) :

pvno    INTEGER  { cmp1999(1), cmp2000(2) }

Now this draft expired on August 12, 2004. My guess is that we'll hear
from the authors of  draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2510bis-09.txt anytime soon,
perhaps this issue will be cleared then. Draft bis07 for RFC2511 has
expired too, I still have to read what Jim Schaad wrote. 

Regards,

Miguel A Rodriguez
SeguriData
Mexico

>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-ietf-pkix@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
>[mailto:owner-ietf-pkix@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lee Hyangjin
>Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 8:43 PM
>To: ietf-pkix@xxxxxxx
>Subject: Question about CMP(RFC2510)
>
>
>
>Hi, 
>
>I have a question on 'pvno' described in RFC2510, chapter 
>3.1.1 PKI Message Header.
>
>In this specfication, 'pvno' field is fixed at one(ietf-version2).
>
>So, I tried to find out the previous version(ietf-version1), I 
>couldn't  find out  in IETF web page.
>
>Why is the version2 ? Is there the previous spec?
>
>
>Regards,
>Lee
>
>******************************************
>Hyangjin Lee
> 
>Researcher
>E-Transaction Security Technology Team
>Korea Information Security Agency
>Tel.82-2-4055-446
>Fax.82-2-4055-499
>E-mail: jiinii@xxxxxxxxxx
>******************************************
>