Subject: [pkix] Early AD review of draft-ietf-pkix-caa

From: Sean Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:04:57 -0400

Philip/Rod,

Thanks for this update.  Here's my early AD comments:

1. s1.2: Maybe add an informative reference to RFC 3647 in the CP/CPS 
definitions.

   Certification Policy (CP)  Specifies the criteria that a
       Certification Authority undertakes to meet in its issue of
       certificates.  See [RFC3647].

    Certification Practices Statement (CPS)  Specifies the means by which
       the criteria of the Certification Policy are met.  In most cases
       this will be the document against which the operations of the
       Certification Authority are audited.  See [RFC3647].

2. s2: I think the following paragraph is good fodder for the proto 
write-up but could be left out of the draft:

  Verification of certificate requests against CAA records published in
  the corresponding domain is currently under consideration by the CA-
  Browser Forum as a required element of the Basic Requirements for
  Certificate issue.

3. s4.1: r/futuree/future

spt

---

From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:09:40 -0400

OK, I can fix these.

I have no problem leaving out the CABForum reference. It was only
really in there to demonstrate that the necessary deployment
constituency exists.

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Sean Turner <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 2. s2: I think the following paragraph is good fodder for the proto write-up
> but could be left out of the draft:
>
> _______________________________________________
> pkix mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix

-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/

---

From: Erwann Abalea <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 22:11:32 +0200

A CP is not a Certification Policy, but a Certificate Policy, i.e. what the
certificate can be used for.

-- 
Erwann.

definitions.

---

From: Sean Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 16:20:02 -0400

You're right I glossed over that.  It's probably something that should 
be changed through the draft.

spt

On 4/23/12 4:11 PM, Erwann Abalea wrote:
> A CP is not a Certification Policy, but a Certificate Policy, i.e. what
> the certificate can be used for.
>
> --
> Erwann.
>
> Le 23 avr. 2012 20:05, "Sean Turner" <[email-masked]
> <mailto:[email-masked]>> a écrit :
>  >
>  > Philip/Rod,
>  >

---

From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 14:12:20 -0400

OK, have submitted a -07 which has these fixed

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Sean Turner <[email-masked]> wrote:
> You're right I glossed over that.  It's probably something that should be
> changed through the draft.
>
> spt
>
>
>>  >
>>  > Philip/Rod,
>>  >
>>  > Thanks for this update.  Here's my early AD comments:
>>  >
>>  > 1. s1.2: Maybe add an informative reference to RFC 3647 in the CP/CPS
>> definitions.
>>  >
>>  >  Certification Policy (CP)  Specifies the criteria that a
>>  >      Certification Authority undertakes to meet in its issue of
>>  >      certificates.  See [RFC3647].
>>  >
>>  >   Certification Practices Statement (CPS)  Specifies the means by which
>>  >      the criteria of the Certification Policy are met.  In most cases
>>  >      this will be the document against which the operations of the
>>  >      Certification Authority are audited.  See [RFC3647].
>>