Re: [lamps] WGLC for draft-ietf-lamps-cert-binding-for-multi-auth

Looking at the IANA Considerations, I think the ASN.1 module should have place holders for the three OIDs that will be assigned:

   id-relatedCert OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { id-pkix 1 tbd }

   id-relatedCertRequest OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { tbd }

   id-ad-relatedCert OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { tbd }

Also, I think the first one should be id-pe-relatedCert, and the second one should be id-aa-relatedCertRequest.

Russ

> On Oct 27, 2023, at 3:01 PM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
> 
> I have read the document and checked the ASN.1.  I think it is ready.
> 
> Russ
> 
>> On Oct 27, 2023, at 11:39 AM, Tim Hollebeek <tim.hollebeek=40digicert.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello,
>>  
>> Since there have been few significant comments or suggestions to this draft 
>> since IETF 117, the authors have requested to proceed to WGLC.  Since people 
>> may be traveling to IETF 118, we’ll do a three week last call.
>>  
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-cert-binding-for-multi-auth/
>>  
>> Abstract
>>  
>>    This document defines a new CSR attribute, relatedCertRequest, and a
>>    new X.509 certificate extension, RelatedCertificate.  The use of the
>>    relatedCertRequest attribute in a CSR and the inclusion of the
>>    RelatedCertificate extension in the resulting certificate together
>>    provide additional assurance that two certificates each belong to the
>>    same end entity.  This mechanism is particularly useful in the
>>    context of non-composite hybrid authentication, which enables users
>>    to employ the same certificates in hybrid authentication as in
>>    authentication done with only traditional or post-quantum algorithms.
>>  
>> Please send all comments to the list by 17 November 2023.
>>  
>> For the chairs,
>>  
>> -Tim
>> _______________________________________________
>> Spasm mailing list
>> Spasm@ietf.org <mailto:Spasm@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm
> 