[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Last Call (CMP proof-of-possession)

To: "Peter Williams" <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Last Call (CMP proof-of-possession)
From: Dean Povey <povey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 97 13:47:17 +1000
Cc: ietf-pkix@xxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: Your message of"Wed, 08 Oct 97 16:25:20 MST." <>

I agree with Peter.  I think this comes down to a policy issue.  I think we 
should mandate support for PoP in implementations, but leave the actual 
decision of whether it is required to be used up to the policy of the 
organisation managing the CA.  I vote for STRONGLY RECOMMENDED.


-- 
+----------------------------------------+-------------------------------+
| Dean Povey,                            |  Email: povey@dstc.edu.au     |
| Research Scientist, Security Unit,     |  Phone: +61 7 3864 2799       | 
| CRC for Distributed Systems Technology |  Fax:   +61 7 3864 1282       |
+----------------------------------------+-------------------------------+

References:
- Re: Last Call (CMP proof-of-possession)
  - From: Peter Williams

Prev by Date: Re: Last Call (CMP proof-of-possession)
Next by Date: Re: Comments on [MANDATORY cert discovery capabiity]
Previous by thread: Re: Last Call (CMP proof-of-possession)
Next by thread: Re: Last Call (CMP proof-of-possession)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread