Who is retarding Pem standards?
shirey@mitre.org Mon, 09 November 1992 14:06 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14052; 9 Nov 92 9:06 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14045; 9 Nov 92 9:06 EST
Received: from TIS.COM by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa24495; 9 Nov 92 9:07 EST
Received: by TIS.COM (4.1/SUN-5.64) id AA19585; Mon, 9 Nov 92 08:59:57 EST
Received: from mwunix.mitre.org by TIS.COM (4.1/SUN-5.64) id AA19578; Mon, 9 Nov 92 08:59:55 EST
Received: from smiley.mitre.org by mwunix.mitre.org (5.61/SMI-2.2) id AA01897; Mon, 9 Nov 92 09:00:00 -0500
Received: from [128.29.140.100] (shirey-mac.mitre.org) by smiley.mitre.org.sit (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA15824; Mon, 9 Nov 92 08:59:49 EST
Message-Id: <9211091359.AA15824@smiley.mitre.org.sit>
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 09:00:28 -0500
To: pem-dev@tis.com
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: shirey@mitre.org
Subject: Who is retarding Pem standards?
X-Orig-Sender: pem-dev-relay@tis.com
The following is a condensation of a recent message: >From: IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> >The IESG has received a request from the TELNET Working Group to >consider the Internet Draft "Telnet Environment Option" ><draft-ietf-telnet-environment-03.txt> as a Proposed Standard. >The IESG plans to issue a recommendation in the next few weeks, and >solicits final comments on this elevation. > >Greg Vaudreuil >IESG Secretary ** WHY HAVEN'T WE SEEN SUCH A MESSAGE CONCERNING THE FOUR PEM DOCUMENTS? ** At the last PEM WG in Cambridge, Mass.in July, minor finishing touches were put on the drafts. These were updated and resubmitted as Internet-Drafts with the following dates: Sep 2 03:56 draft-ietf-pem-forms-01.txt Aug 7 03:54 draft-ietf-pem-keymgmt-01.txt Jul 25 03:54 draft-ietf-pem-msgproc-02.txt Sep 2 03:56 draft-ietf-pem-notary-00.txt The meeting understood that these were to be ASAP passed to the IESG. We understood that the PEM WG Chair and the IESG Security Area Director had this action. Why have they not been processed? Whether the reference implementation is ready or not is irrelevant. Others are interested in implementing and deploying, too. Are we to wait until the IETF this month, only to find that we are discussing the same drafts again in the PEM WG? I think people should act VERY ANNNOYED if that happens. WGs are supposed to exist as a mailing list, and as much business is supposed to be done that way as possible. If someone decided to hold up these standards, they were obligated to inform pem-dev immediately so that the issues could be resolved. I have not received such a message. The language of Greg's message is interesting. "The IESG has received a request *FROM THE TELNET WORKING GROUP* to consider the Internet Draft . . ." If there is a concensus of the WG that these standards are ready to advance, I intend to move that the WG Chair send them directly to the IESG Chair. There should be a real sense of urgency here. The PEM capability is intended to provide a significant social benefit for many persons around the world. RSA has given away RSARef to make it possible for everyone to benefit. If PEM is not advanced quickly, stuff like PGP will blunt its effectiveness. (It is also possible that the Government may try to make the whole thing illegal before it can be deployed widely. That would not stop use by scattered groups, but it would eliminate commercial support and an integrated, Internet-wide system.) The first PEM RFC, #989, was published in February 1987. That means some of us have been working on this for more than six years. Any further delays are intolerable. Let's get it on. Regards, -Rob- Robert W. Shirey, The MITRE Corporation, Mail Stop Z202 7525 Colshire Dr., McLean, Virginia 22102-3481 USA shirey@mitre.org * tel 703-883-7210 * fax 703-883-1397
- Who is retarding Pem standards? shirey
- Re: Who is retarding Pem standards? Stephen D Crocker
- Re: Who is retarding Pem standards? David M. Balenson
- Re: Who is retarding Pem standards? shirey