Subject: meeting minutes

From: Stephen Kent <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 22:03:01 -0500

Folks,

Here are the draft meeting minutes from PKIX.  Please reply with 
corrections by 12/31. Pardon the text alignment problems in this 
version.  The final version will fix those problems.

Also, all speakers who would like their slides included in the IETF 
archive for this meeting should e-mail them to me (as power point 
files) over the next 2 weeks.

Thanks,

Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PKIX WG Meeting 12/12-13/00
Edited by Steve Kent (WG co-chairs)

The PKIX WG met twice during the 48th IETF. A total of approximately 
200 individuals participated in the first meeting, and about 150 in 
the second.

Day 1 (12/12/00)

Tim quickly reviewed the agenda and document status, noting that 
there are 20  I-Ds in progress. (see slides)

Qualified Certificates Profile - Stefan Santesson (Addtrust)
       This document has been approved as a Standards track RFC and
       is currently in the editors queue.  Stefan briefly discussed the
       status of the corresponding ETSI specification that refers to this RFC.
In a new item, Stefan briefly discussed the idea of a new extension 
that could be used to refer (with integrity) to corporate logos for 
subjects and issuers, as an aid to users when they display 
certificates. Steve Kent expressed some concern that such graphics 
might undermine the security offered by the name constraints 
extension, IF a CA accidentally or maliciously binds a logo to a name 
which is not really related to the name.

Attribute Certificate Profile - Steve Farrell (Baltimore)
       This document has been through working group Last Call and is
currently under Area Director Review.  Steve described the status of 
this document, including changes made as a consequence of Last Call. 
Denis alluded to a problem in the base ISO spec which has been 
inherited by the PKIX document.

Data Validation and Certification Server - Carlisle Adams (Entrust)
       This document has been approved as a Experimental
       track RFC and is currently in the editing queue.

Time Stamp Protocols (TSP) - Denis Pinkas (Bull)
       This document has been through working group Last Call and is
       currently under Area Director Review.  Denis described the changes
made to the TSP specification as a consequence of Last Call, and the 
creation of an appendix to specify the SIA extension. This appendix 
is a temporary one, and the SIA extension will later be moved to RFC 
2459bis, when then document is issued. ETSI will work on a TSP 
security policy document, analogous to one ETSi is working on for CA 
security policy. Denis offers to initiate further work, to specify a 
set of standard TSA policies. This would require a mod to the current 
PKIX charter.

Permanent Identifier - Denis Pinkas (Bull)
       This document is stable and ready for progression as an RFC.
The question before the WG is what status should be attached to the 
document, i.e., standards track, informational, or experimental? A 
quick poll of attendees suggests support for standards track, but 
since the number of folks who claim familiarity with the document was 
small, we will bring this to the list for a straw poll for final 
resolution. Bob Moskowitz cited a potential problem with current CA 
implementations, if one tried to request a certificate with a new 
name, signing the request with a key bound to a certificate with a 
different name.

Technical Non-Repudiation - Tom Gindin (IBM)
       This document is ready to proceed as an Informational track
specification. Denis presented a few slides raising issues that he 
feels need to be addressed prior to publication as information. For 
example, he notes that ETSI has a standard for 1-way NR which is 
viewed as sufficient for legal NR purposes, not consistent with this 
draft. Denis will correspond with Tom to resolve this and related 
issues.

Delegated Path Validation & Discovery Services - Steve Kent (BBN)
       The working group has been presented with two alternative
Proposals: Simple Certificate Validation Protocol (SCVP) and 
extensions to OCSP (v2) for Delegated path Discovery and Validation. 
Steve Kent presented a proposed set of criteria, and associated 
rationales, for use in evaluating these competing proposals. Steve 
will follow up with an extended message on the topic to the mailing 
list, to establish consensus for selection criteria.

Day 2 (12/13/00)

CMP/CRMF Interoperability Results - Bob Moskowitz (ICSA Labs)
       Bob has been organizing interoperability testing for CRMF/CMP
       Implementations.  This testing will support the progression of CMP
and CRMF to Draft standard. Bob discussed results of recent test 
activities, which are leading to an interoperability test report.

Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) - Carlisle Adams (Entrust)
	This document incorporates clarifications to RFC 2510.  These
       changes are proposed as a result of interoperability testing.
This specification is ready for Last Call and progression of CMP to 
Draft Standard. The editors believe that the changes made from the 
previous version are minor and thus the document should progress to 
DRAFT standard.

Certificate Request Message Format (CRMF) - Carlisle Adams (Entrust)
	This document incorporates clarifications to RFC 2511.  These
       changes are proposed as a result of interoperability testing.
       This specification is now ready for Last Call and progression
of CRMF to Draft Standard.

Certificate and CRL Profile revisions - Russ Housley (SPYRUS)
       This document is the follow-up to RFC 2459.  A new draft of this
document has been published. The document is ready for Working Group 
Last Call, modulo a difference of opinion between X.509 and PKIX re 
name constraints. It is not clear whether we can achieve agreement 
with X.509 over this, or if we need to diverge. We set 2/14 as a 
"drop dead" date, i.e., either we reconcile with X.509 by then, OR we 
assign a distinct OID for the "PKIX name constraints extension." This 
date was chosen based on a planned X.509 meeting in late January. 
Since a number of changes have been made and since they are 
substantive, this document will be considered as a Proposed Standard.

  Public Key Algorithms and Identifiers - Russ Housley (SPYRUS)
       This document is a companion to the Certificate and CRL Profile.
       This specification contains the algorithm-specific information,
       such as OIDs and encoding information.  This specification is
       ready for WG Last Call and is expected to progress to Proposed
Standard with the Certificate and CRL Profile. Jim Schaad suggested 
that DSA/SHA-1 be mandated, with RSA/MD2 prohibited for new 
certificates. An attendee suggested that RSA should be mandated, 
based on existing deployment. Jeff Schiller noted that the SAAG 
argued for consistency among the major certificate client protocols: 
IPsec, S/MIME, and TLS. Steve Kent agreed to call for a straw poll on 
the PKIX list re this topic.

OCSPv2 - Michael Myers (VeriSign)
	This document incorporates clarifications and enhancements to
RFC 2560, plus DPD & DPV extensions. A major issue is whether we 
should progress this document to DRAFT, or make changes, specifically 
to the certificate ID mechanism, to cycle at proposed. Mike described 
the proposed new certificate ID forms; the WG needs to decide if 
support for all of these forms is appropriate. For example, an 
attendee noted that issuer name and serial number works even if the 
server is CRL driven, but certificate hash is not derivable from a 
CRL. Thus support for some forms of certificate IDs implies server 
database capabilities that must be explicitly defined and agreed 
upon. Another attendee raised concerns that the status response (a 
CHOICE today) may be overloaded when one tries to encompass path 
validation, vs. validation of individual certificates. Steve Kent 
noted that processing the DPD and DPV extensions represents 
substantial new functionality and complexity to an OCSP v1 server, so 
that it is not appropriate to characterize the complexity of these 
new extensions purely in terms of their (minimal) syntax.

Comments on OCSPv2 - Denis Pinkas (Bull)
Denis agreed that there is a need to revise OCSP, for several minor 
but important editorial reasons, but he argues that while there are 
deficiencies in the certificate ID in v1, but that existing OCSP 
clients do find the certificate ID facility adequate for the simple 
purpose of revocation status checking. The major motivation for 
expanding the certificate ID types is to support extensions such as 
DPV or DPD. He suggested that we revise OCSP, but only to add an 
ASN.1 module OID, re-specify a mandatory algorithm, and to clarify 
the status returned, not to support extensions such as DPD and DPV.

Comments on OCSPv2 - Ambarish Malpani (ValiCert)
Ambarish notes that there are at least 11 independent implementations 
of OCSP v1, many users, etc. For the original, intended purpose, he 
argues that the current deployment success attests to the adequacy of 
the current spec. He noted that the use model assumes that the client 
has all of the certificates in a chain and thus the limitations on 
certificate IDs are not severe, although he admitted the design could 
have been better in this regard.

PKIX Roadmap - Sean Turner (IECA)
       This document provides an overview or "roadmap" of the work
       done by the IETF PKIX working group. It defines common terms,
       describes basic theory behind PKI, and provides an overview of
       PKIX documents and the relationships between them.  This document
is now fairly stable; the editor and WG chairs agree to execute WG 
last call, for this to become an informational RFC.

Operational Protocols, LDAPv3 - David Chadwick (Univ. of Salford)
       This document is the LDAPv3 analog of RFC 2559.  This document
       describes the features of LDAPv3 that are essential, or not
       required, or are optional for servers to support a PKI based
on X.509. David reviewed the mandatory, recommended and not 
recommended, aspects of the profile.

CP/CPS Framework - Tim Polk (on behalf of Santosh Chokhani, Cygnacom)
       An ad hoc group of PKIX and ABA members has been working on
       revisions to RFC 2527, the "Certificate Policy and Certification
       Practices Framework".  A new draft will be posted in the near
       future.  This update will describe expected changes in the
document. Tim did not present Santosh's slides, due to time 
constraints, but the slides will be posted to the IETF web site.

Attribute Certificate Acquisition Protocol - Steve Farrell (Baltimore)
       This document specifies a deliberately limited protocol for
requesting attribute certificates from a server. No presentation was 
made on this document, since there was no significant progress to 
report.

Repository Locator Service - Phil Hallem-Baker (VeriSign)
       This document leverages DNS and DNS SRV records to enable
       Certificate using systems to locate PKI repositories
       based on a domain name, identify the protocols that can be
       used to access the repository, and obtain addresses for the
servers that host the repository service. The current plan is to 
progress this as an experimental track RFC.

PKIX and XML - Phil Hallem-Baker (VeriSign)

Phil first noted that mere re-encoding of certificates in XML does 
not seem to be a valuable exercise. A second approach might be to 
re-encode and change some semantics at the same time, but this too is 
not very attractive. Instead, the work Phil reported on envisions a 
fresh start for a native XML PKI model, using XML encryption, 
signatures, SOAP, etc., i.e., a PKI that is deeply entwined in the 
XML environment. Several observations are made about why PKI 
deployment has not been as successful as we would all hope, e.g., 
applications that are not compliant with standards. XML key 
management services (XKMS) is an attempt to provide an interface, not 
an infrastructure, which will yield a very small footprint 
implementation (because of delegated validation), thus removing an 
impediment from deployment. "Trust services" form the core of this 
scheme, using delegated validation in various structural schema, 
e.g., completely centralized, DNS-tree structure, PGP-web, X.509 
cross certification, etc. It is not clear in which context this work 
should proceed, e.g., it may be more appropriate in W3C vs. the IETF.

---

From: "Michael Myers" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 15:25:06 -0800

Steve,

Carlisle also brought notice to the WG of the PKI Forum's intent to stage an
OCSPv1 interop activity.

Mike