Re: [lamps] Preparation for draft-ietf-lamps-RFC4210bis

[Carlisle Adams <[e-mail]>]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for clarifying.  Yes, feel free to send me such questions if they arise.

Carlisle.

________________________________
From: Mike Ounsworth <[e-mail]>
Sent: July 28, 2022 7:42 AM
To: Carlisle Adams <[e-mail]>; Brockhaus, Hendrik <[e-mail]>; Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>; Tomi Kause <[e-mail]>; Tero Mononen <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; von Oheimb, David <[e-mail]>; John Gray <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Preparation for draft-ietf-lamps-RFC4210bis

Attention : courriel externe | external email

Hiya Carlisle!



What we would really love from you is not to field questions on the changes (we can handle that), but just to be on hand if there are questions on the original content of CMP (RFC 4210).



It’s clear that the 2005-era CMP protocol does not fit with the modern protocol design philosophy of making everything JSON-over-HTTPS, and other modern crypto protocol best-practices. With the IESG’s request to roll our diffs into a full update document, we are concerned that the fundamental CMP design will be challenged. There may or may not be any questions of that nature, but it would be nice to know that you’re around if there are questions that go beyond our collective institutional knowledge.



---

Mike Ounsworth



From: Spasm <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Carlisle Adams
Sent: July 27, 2022 3:48 PM
To: Brockhaus, Hendrik <[e-mail]>; Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>; Tomi Kause <[e-mail]>; Tero Mononen <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; von Oheimb, David <[e-mail]>; John Gray <[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [lamps] Preparation for draft-ietf-lamps-RFC4210bis



WARNING: This email originated outside of Entrust.
DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe.

________________________________

Hello Hendrik, all,



Thank you for this reminder!



Unfortunately, my schedule is pretty full at the moment, and so I have not had a chance to do more than give a very cursory glance at the CMP updates.  In any case, nothing jumped out at me as something to object to, so I guess I'm fine with this updates draft.  ??



I am willing to be listed as a co-author if someone can think of a reason for me to be there, but I have not read this update in detail, and I don't know if I will be available to respond to queries in the near future, so perhaps it makes more sense to leave my name out.  Let me know if you want to discuss further.



Carlisle.



________________________________

From: Brockhaus, Hendrik <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: July 27, 2022 4:12 PM
To: Carlisle Adams <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Tomi Kause <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Tero Mononen <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; von Oheimb, David <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; John Gray <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: AW: Preparation for draft-ietf-lamps-RFC4210bis



Attention : courriel externe | external email

After today's discussion of the CMP Updates draft and RFC4210bis, I would appreciate any, positive :-) as well as negative:-(, feedback from the original authors of RFC4210 if I may list them as co-authors.
As there is summer vacation season in many placed, I would like to ensure, that everyone is aware of this activity and had the chance to join in.

Many thanks,
Hendrik

> Von: Brockhaus, Hendrik (T CST SEA-DE)
>
> Dear authors of RFC4210
>
> IESG approved the CMP Updates draft. During IESG review, the AD requested to
> provide an RFC4210bis document containing the changes made by CMP
> Updates.
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-updates/ballot/#draft-<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-updates/ballot/*draft-__;Iw!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!aW-KEiSZ8U3HPhJqa6ZdRHCwhyDfpVsHEA_1thnkbDSTm5mF-OqIFUfIHlPo_m4jW3eUDXS2mkKI13JQ0NcIYq_eQ6Yj$>
> ietf-lamps-cmp-updates_paul-wouters
>
> In preparation for draft-ietf-lamps-RFC4210bis, I want to ask you to support this
> draft as co-authors.
> Help needed for this draft is mainly to respond to queries from WG or AD
> reviews related to the original text of RFC4210.
> The minimum action required by all authors is to timely approve the final
> document in AUTH48 right before publication.
> Please give me feedback if I can put your name on the author section of the new
> document.
>
> Of course, further WG members are welcome to support this activity as reviewer
> or as co-author.
>
> Hendrik
>
>
> > Von: The IESG <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
> >
> > The IESG has approved the following document:
> > - 'Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) Updates'
> >   (draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-updates-23.txt) as Proposed Standard
> >
> > This document is the product of the Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX
> > and SMIME Working Group.
> >
> > The IESG contact persons are Paul Wouters and Roman Danyliw.
> >
> > A URL of this Internet Draft is:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-updates/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-updates/__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!aW-KEiSZ8U3HPhJqa6ZdRHCwhyDfpVsHEA_1thnkbDSTm5mF-OqIFUfIHlPo_m4jW3eUDXS2mkKI13JQ0NcIYkFdOQX_$>

Any email and files/attachments transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If this message has been sent to you in error, you must not copy, distribute or disclose of the information it contains. Please notify Entrust immediately and delete the message from your system.