RE: Minor OID mistakes in OCSPv2 and the official OID list

["Housley, Russ" <[e-mail]>]

Mike:

This seems like a reasonable thing to do as the PKIX WG is winding 
down.  Is there really any point in a document that documents the current 
snapshot?

Russ

At 02:13 PM 5/29/2001 -0700, Michael Myers wrote:
>Russ,
>
>Good to hear of this.  Thanks.  Any chance for an Informational I-D laying
>out the OID structure?  I'm willing to help.
>
>Mike
>
>
>
>Michael Myers
>t: +415.819.1362
>e: mailto:[e-mail]
>w: http://www.traceroutesecurity.com
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Russ Housley [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 1:05 PM
> > To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> > Cc: [e-mail]
> > Subject: RE: Minor OID mistakes in OCSPv2 and the official OID list
> >
> >
> > Mike:
> >
> > Temporal Data Authority (TDA) has disappeared from the TSP
> > document. So, no
> > OID is needed for it, and it can be re-assigned. We got luckly this time,
> > so I did the reassignment.
> >
> >       id-kp-OCSPSigning OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { id-kp 9 }
> >
> > Please help avoid future collisions!  In the future, any PKIX document
> > editor that needs an OID, please send mail to
> > [e-mail] to
> > request it.  Do not make a guess at the value that might be assigned!
> >
> > Regards,
> >    Russ
> >
> >  > >From: "Michael Myers" <[e-mail]>
> >  > >To: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
> >  > >         <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
> >  > >Subject: RE: Minor OID mistakes in OCSPv2 and the official OID list
> >  > >Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 13:01:16 -0700
> >  > >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
> >  > >Importance: Normal
> >  > >Sender: [e-mail]
> >  > >List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-pkix/mail-archive/>
> >  > >List-ID: <ietf-pkix.imc.org>
> >  > >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[e-mail]?body=unsubscribe>
> >  > >List-ID: <ietf-pkix.imc.org>
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > >On Saturday, May 19, 2001, at the inspiring hour of 3:30 AM,
> > Peter Gutman
> >  > >advised:
> >  > >
> >  > > > Given that there are already certs (and lots of software)
> >  > > > out there which use the current OID, wouldn't it be better
> >  > > > to relocate temporalDataAuthority (what is that anyway?
> >  > > > Does anyone use it? It looks like an oddly-named TSA OID).
> >  > > >
> >  > > > (Given that the OCSP OID is already in active use, I suspect
> >  > > > {id-kp 9} will remain "the OCSP OID" even if it's officially
> >  > > >  reassigned, this my comment that it's going to be easier for
> >  > > > Mohammed to go to the mountain).
> >  > > >
> >  > > > Peter.
> >  > >
> >  > >Peter,
> >  > >
> >  > >Certainly a more pragmatic approach.  As a consequence I've
> > spent some time
> >  > >today searching across the various current and historical IETF work
> > products
> >  > >to do kind of an environmental impact assessment of simply
> > re-labelling
> >  > >{id-kp 9} from "id-kp-temporalDataAuthority" to "id-kp-OCSPSigning".
> >  > >
> >  > >As it turns out, the notion of a Temporal Data Authority (TDA) and a
> >  > >corresponding {id-kp 9} definition was introduced at least by
> >  >
> > >http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/99jul/I-D/draft-ietf-pkix-time-stamp-02.
> > txt.
> >  > >However, by the -14 edition the concept went away:
> >  > >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pkix-time-stamp-14.txt.
> >  > >
> >  > >So the path seems clear to redefine {id-kp 9} as
> > id-kp-OCSPSigning with no
> >  > >impact to timestamping implementors.  Doing so would benefit
> > standing OCSP
> >  > >implementations but does not excuse the OCSP authors, myself
> > included, from
> >  > >a swift kick in the butt for failing to coordinate across the
> > WG on this
> >  > >point.
> >  > >
> >  > >Incidentally, it might be useful to produce the relevant OID
> > list into a
> >  > >PKIX work product so that once PKIX wraps clues are left
> > behind how the
> >  > >pieces are supposed to bolt together.
> >  > >
> >  > >Mike
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > >Michael Myers
> >  > >t: +415.819.1362
> >  > >e: mailto:[e-mail]
> >  > >w: http://www.traceroutesecurity.com
> >