Subject: [lamps] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-updates-14 and draft-ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile-08

From: Russ Housley <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 13:03:37 -0500

This is a WG Last Call for two CMP documents.  Please review them and let us know whether the are ready to be sent to the IESG.  Please respond by 10 December 2021.

Title: Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) Updates

Datatracker: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-updates

Abstract

   This document contains a set of updates to the syntax and transfer of
   Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) version 2.  This document
   updates RFC 4210, RFC 5912, and RFC 6712.

   The aspects of CMP updated in this document are using EnvelopedData
   instead of EncryptedValue, clarifying the handling of p10cr messages,
   improving the crypto agility, as well as adding new general message
   types, extended key usages to identify certificates for use with CMP,
   and '.well-known' HTTP path segments.

   To properly differentiate the support of EnvelopedData instead of
   EncryptedValue, the CMP version 3 is introduced in case a transaction
   is supposed to use EnvelopedData.

   CMP version 3 is introduced to enable signaling support of
   EnvelopedData instead of EncryptedValue and signaling the use of an
   explicit hash AlgorithmIdentifier in certConf messages, as far as
   needed.

Title: Lightweight Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) Profile

Datatracker: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile

Abstract

   This document aims at simple, interoperable, and automated PKI
   management operations covering typical use cases of industrial and
   IoT scenarios.  This is achieved by profiling the Certificate
   Management Protocol (CMP), the related Certificate Request Message
   Format (CRMF), and HTTP-based or CoAP-based transfer in a succinct
   but sufficiently detailed and self-contained way.  To make secure
   certificate management for simple scenarios and constrained devices
   as lightweight as possible, only the most crucial types of operations
   and options are specified as mandatory.  More special and complex use
   cases are supported as well, by features specified as recommended or
   optional.

For the LAMPS WG Chairs,
 Russ