Subject: PKIX agenda requests

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:52:40 -0400

Folks,

PKIX is scheduled for Wednesday November 10, 1 - 3:00 PM at the 60th IETF (in 
Washington).

I spaced on agenda requests, and the time for WG agenda submissions is winding 
down.  My apologies about the late notice, but I would like to submit a draft 
agenda next Monday by the noon deadline.

Please send me your agenda requests as soon as possible.  I will as always 
give preference to WG documents, but will try to fit in related personal 
drafts and liasion presentations.

Thanks,

Tim Polk

---

From: Denis Pinkas <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:26:18 +0200

Tim,

Since you are listening and asking for agenda topics, revision of RFC 3280 
should be a top priority item on the list.

It is time to start the writing of a draft document which summarizes all the 
candidate changes which should be done to RFC 3280.

Then would you also ask if there are co-editors volunteer to write 
son-of-RFC 3280 ?

Denis

---

From: "David W Chadwick" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:38:46 +0100

Tim

I would like to present the LDAP schemas (for informational RFCs) for last
call as agreed at the last meeting. The final versions will be submitted to
the editor today

Regards

David

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] 
> [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of [email-masked]
> Sent: 22 October 2004 02:53
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: PKIX agenda requests
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Folks,
> 
> PKIX is scheduled for Wednesday November 10, 1 - 3:00 PM at 
> the 60th IETF (in Washington).
> 
> I spaced on agenda requests, and the time for WG agenda 
> submissions is winding down.  My apologies about the late 
> notice, but I would like to submit a draft agenda next Monday 
> by the noon deadline.
> 
> Please send me your agenda requests as soon as possible.  I 
> will as always give preference to WG documents, but will try 
> to fit in related personal drafts and liasion presentations.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tim Polk
> 
>

---

From: Tim Polk <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 11:30:41 -0400

Denis,

Thank you for raising this issue.  3280bis will certainly be on the agenda 
at the 61st IETF, but I had forgotten to post a call for issues.

Here is a preview of the 3280bis discussion:
(1) I have volunteered David Cooper as lead editor for 3280bis. ISO-PKIX 
consistency is a key issue, and David was a key contributor in both arenas.
(2) David is assembling an issues list from old PKIX mailing list traffic, 
as well as issues that had been pointed out to the 3280 editors.
(3) Steve and I have assembled a small design team to publish the -00 
draft.   The group includes product expertise as well as former ISO and 
PKIX editors.
(4) When the -00 draft is published, David will also post the list of 
issues and how they were resolved.  This will let the WG quickly identify 
modifications to the text, and the rationale.

We need all WG members to document and submit any issues that need to be 
addressed in RFC 3280.  Note that the scope of this effort is limited to 
clarification of existing features where required to achieve 
interoperability or maintain consistency with ISO X.509, and removal of 
features where two implementations did not exist.  New features would 
jeopardize the progression from Draft to Proposed.

Issues may be submitted to the list, but please CC David Cooper at 
[email-masked] on any issues lists!

Thanks,

Tim

At 04:26 PM 10/22/2004 +0200, Denis Pinkas wrote:
>It is time to start the writing of a draft document which summarizes all 
>the candidate changes which should be done to RFC 3280.
>
>>PKIX is scheduled for Wednesday November 10, 1 - 3:00 PM at the 60th IETF 
>>(in Washington).
>>I spaced on agenda requests, and the time for WG agenda submissions is 
>>winding down.  My apologies about the late notice, but I would like to 
>>submit a draft agenda next Monday by the noon deadline.
>>Please send me your agenda requests as soon as possible.  I will as 
>>always give preference to WG documents, but will try to fit in related 
>>personal drafts and liasion presentations.
>>Thanks,
>>Tim Polk
>
>
>
>

---

From: Tom Gindin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:01:46 -0400

Tim, David:

        Is the question of whether constraint values should be permitted 
in the "Initialization" step of standard path validation within scope for 
this effort?  I realize that to avoid declaring existing implementations 
non-conformant we would need to make support for this feature optional. 
There don't appear to be any serious compatibility issues, at least to me.

                Tom Gindin

Tim Polk <[email-masked]>
Sent by: [email-masked]
10/25/2004 11:30 AM
 
        To:     Denis Pinkas <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
        cc:     [email-masked]
        Subject:        Call for 3280 issues (was Re: PKIX agenda 
requests)

Denis,

Here is a preview of the 3280bis discussion:
(1) I have volunteered David Cooper as lead editor for 3280bis. ISO-PKIX 
consistency is a key issue, and David was a key contributor in both 
arenas.
(2) David is assembling an issues list from old PKIX mailing list traffic, 

Thanks,

Tim