[lamps] RFC 9399 on Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure: Logotypes in X.509 Certificates
rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Fri, 05 May 2023 22:53 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfcpa.amsl.com>
X-Original-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2637C17CE9D; Fri, 5 May 2023 15:53:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.947
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5UnfatzeWmeO; Fri, 5 May 2023 15:53:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (rfc-editor.org [50.223.129.200]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A00B0C17CE8A; Fri, 5 May 2023 15:53:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfcpa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 499) id 8D06855EB3; Fri, 5 May 2023 15:53:11 -0700 (PDT)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, drafts-update-ref@iana.org, spasm@ietf.org
Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20230505225311.8D06855EB3@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 05 May 2023 15:53:11 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/k-bZzEVb1QZmdhvaN9MwRsoQCYE>
Subject: [lamps] RFC 9399 on Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure: Logotypes in X.509 Certificates
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is a venue for discussion of doing Some Pkix And SMime \(spasm\) work." <spasm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spasm/>
List-Post: <mailto:spasm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 May 2023 22:53:16 -0000
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 9399
Title: Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure:
Logotypes in X.509 Certificates
Author: S. Santesson,
R. Housley,
T. Freeman,
L. Rosenthol
Status: Standards Track
Stream: IETF
Date: May 2023
Mailbox: sts@aaa-sec.com,
housley@vigilsec.com,
frtrevor@amazon.com,
lrosenth@adobe.com
Pages: 39
Obsoletes: RFC 3709, RFC 6170
I-D Tag: draft-ietf-lamps-rfc3709bis-10.txt
URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9399
DOI: 10.17487/RFC9399
This document specifies a certificate extension for including
logotypes in public key certificates and attribute certificates. This
document obsoletes RFCs 3709 and 6170.
This document is a product of the Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME Working Group of the IETF.
This is now a Proposed Standard.
STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the
standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this
memo is unlimited.
This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk
Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.
The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC