Protocol Action: 'Server-based Certificate Validation Protocol (SCVP)' to Proposed Standard

The IESG <> Tue, 25 September 2007 19:06 UTC

Return-path: <>
Received: from [] ( by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IaFkH-0004OV-Nv; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:06:57 -0400
Received: from [] ( by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IaFkG-0004Nl-0h for; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:06:56 -0400
Received: from ([]) by with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IaFkF-0001Sj-MV for; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:06:55 -0400
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96A4A2AC96; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 19:06:25 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ietf by with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IaFjl-0003DY-83; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:06:25 -0400
X-test-idtracker: no
From: The IESG <>
To: IETF-Announce <>
Message-Id: <>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:06:25 -0400
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d
Cc: pkix mailing list <>, pkix chair <>, Internet Architecture Board <>, RFC Editor <>
Subject: Protocol Action: 'Server-based Certificate Validation Protocol (SCVP)' to Proposed Standard
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>

The IESG has approved the following document:

- 'Server-based Certificate Validation Protocol (SCVP) '
   <draft-ietf-pkix-scvp-33.txt> as a Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509) 
Working Group. 

The IESG contact persons are Sam Hartman and Tim Polk.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:

Technical Summary
   SCVP allows a client to delegate certificate path construction and
   certificate path validation to a server.  The path construction or
   validation (e.g., making sure that none of the certificates in the
   path are revoked) is performed according to a validation policy,
   which contains one or more trust anchors.  It allows simplification
   of client implementations and use of a set of predefined validation

Working Group Summary

   The working group expressed consensus to advance the draft to 
   Proposed Standard.  Two participants raised concerns that this 
   protocol did  not meet all the requirements of RFC 3379 and introduced

   significant new features.  The working group investigated this claim 
   and concluded that after minor revisions this document does meet the 
   requirements and does not introduce significant new features.
Protocol Quality
   This document has been reviewed by members of the
   mailing list and by the working group chairs. The protocol seems
reasonable.  This has been reviewed by Sam Hartman for the IESG.

IETF-Announce mailing list