Subject: Re: [pkix] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pkix-est-00.txt

From: Stephen Kent <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 11:01:34 -0500

Anders,

>...
>End-to-end of the kind you and I are referring to isn't known by the
>the PKIX WG at large and therefore this discussion (early on) went south.
>
>Anyway, my take on this topic is creating a united solution where
>certificate enrollment has morphed into or token management.

EST was not approved as a WG item with the understanding that it would
focus on token management. That functionality is not on the table.

Since your message of 1/28 included the statement:

>In fact, this discussion clarifies why PKIX isn't the right forum 
>for addressing the needs of the mobile connected world where virtual 
>smart cards will be the norm.

let's discontinue this thread and return to comments on EST relative to
the functions that is claims to offer.

Steve

---

From: Anders Rundgren <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2012 07:45:07 +0100

> the functions that is claims to offer.

Sure we can drop this thread.  I was just a bit more interested in
hearing what possible "markets" and "use-cases" that PKIX had in mind.

The KEYPROV WG which several PKIXers participated in took 3.5 years
completing as a standard, and then nobody cared :-(

Anders