Re: [IETF-PKIX] draft meeting minutes

[Warwick Ford <wford@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Steve:

Great minutes, as usual!  I have just a couple of suggested mods:

At 09:09 AM 12/11/97 -0500, Stephen Kent wrote:
>PKIX WG Meeting Minutes (12/8+10/97)
>
>Approximately xxx attendees participated in the two PKIX WG session at

xxx = 360

>Certificate Request Syntax (PKCS7/10 focus)
>
>A proposal was made to move work on this to S/MIME WG, and Schiller
>and Housley (S/MIME WG chair) have no objections.  However, this work
>is not S/MIME-specific and several PKIX and S/MIME WG members believe
>that this work item should remain in PKIX, as it is more general.  The
>fundamental question is whether CRS is a completely separate protocol,
>focused on S/MIME, or if it is a profile for Part 3.  Not resolved,

Replace "Not resolved, but straw poll..." by:  "This was subsequently
resolved [See later item.]  A straw poll..."

>but straw poll of attendees showed a plurality of attendees in favor of
>keeping the work item in this WG, and only a single vote in favor of
>moving it to S/MIME.  The S/MIME WG, meeting two days later, concurred
>with this and did not recommend adoption of CRS within that WG.

Add:  "...assuming PKIX would reconcile CRS/CMP differences and include a
specification for securely transporting commonly-agreed certificate
management messages over CMS (i.e., son-of-PKCS#7)."

>
>At the second PKIX WG meeting, a compromise approach was announced,
>reconciling CRS and CMP...

Following is a proposed revision of this entire paragraph:

At the second PKIX WG meeting, a compromise approach was announced, aimed
at reconciling differences between CRS and CMP.  In essence, a common
certificate request message syntax has been agreed, and CMP will adopt this
syntax as the certificate request payload type within that protocol
(replacing the current certificate request payload format).  CRS will be
revised to also reference that syntax.  This new, harmonized certificate
request format will appear as a separate RFC.  It is not anticipated that
this will delay the progression of CMP to proposed standard, since it is
simply a protocol syntax change for alignment purposes plus a splitting of
one document into two in the interests of facilitating future developments.
 CRS will continue to progress, specifying the mapping of certificate
management messages onto CMS and providing the vehicle for developing
common formats for other certificate management messages (i.e., messages
other than certificate request)."

Warwick

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Warwick Ford, VeriSign, Inc., One Alewife Center, Cambridge, MA 02140
   wford@verisign.com; Tel: (617)492 2816 x225; Fax: (617)661 0716
---------------------------------------------------------------------