[pkix] Is it time for a pkix extensions (or similar) wg?

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Fri, 05 February 2016 11:56 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: pkix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pkix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 118E81B3755 for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 03:56:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.302
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.302 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ho4JzGAUhQgr for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 03:56:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCF7C1B3750 for <pkix@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 03:56:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D72BBE3F for <pkix@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 11:56:31 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G4dkafYrbGSt for <pkix@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 11:56:31 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [134.226.36.93] (bilbo.dsg.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.36.93]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E7895BDCC for <pkix@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 11:56:30 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1454673391; bh=9SrVgC2NEK3ifEqpJ+ugZg/uwSVAC9bN6gHHH+esZlU=; h=To:From:Subject:Date:From; b=TqV7Es5g6yfLv+abcMgpKbjIpMcNozekIsmZqMjJl/1C0H9EH8PEbWaGQpKlBLh02 96WXEiEBE3dIUraNolzTek5EF4tH3mUHbsiyqCAPXQXizRslRdDAu/zpM+5xTAp+Fg ktkFwfto3ZoZTIm2FwTl+pbnUDD5sJnrLGHeo/Bk=
To: pkix <pkix@ietf.org>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <56B48DED.5080202@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 11:56:29 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pkix/SYjftGy0a8RyUp_gQq4GpFdBW5A>
Subject: [pkix] Is it time for a pkix extensions (or similar) wg?
X-BeenThere: pkix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: PKIX Working Group <pkix.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pkix>, <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pkix/>
List-Post: <mailto:pkix@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix>, <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 11:56:34 -0000

Hiya,

We seem to be seeing a number of drafts that folks are
writing that define new certificate extensions or that
want to update/modify PKIX specs.

Do folks think it is now time to form a working group
to process those?

If no, please say why.

If yes, please say what draft(s) and propose any other
scoping. If you know of people who are or would implement
and deploy, that is very useful information. (It is fine
to say "I think we should work on topic <foo>" but it is
*much* better if you can point at a draft you've written
about <foo> and say that you or someone is implementing
that and that it'll get deployed.)

If you think this requires face to face discussion at
IETF95 (e.g. to tease out scope) please say that too.
We still have a couple of weeks before the BoF deadline
and if a short session is needed that can be arranged.
Note though that there is no need to have such a BoF
session to form a WG, if everything is clear already.

FWIW, my impression is that we do seem to have a handful
of drafts where folks seem willing to do the work and
where the work might be (or has been) implemented. So
if there's enough interest, I'd be supportive of forming
a (hopefully:-) short-lived, tightly scoped, WG to handle
that work.

Cheers,
S.