Re: [lamps] rfc7030-est clarifications and LAMPS charter

[Russ Housley <[e-mail]>]

The definition of ATTRIBUTE and Attribute  should be IMPORTed, not included here.

That leads to:

   AttrOrOID ::= CHOICE {
     oid        OBJECT IDENTIFIER,
     attribute  Attribute {{AttrSet}} }

   AttrSet ATTRIBUTE ::= { ... }

Russ

> On Jul 26, 2019, at 4:47 PM, Michael Richardson <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Signed PGP part
> 
> secdispatch said that
>  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-richardson-lamps-rfc7030est-clarify/
> 
> belongs in LAMPS.  The word was that the charter did not include fixing
> things.  The first paragragh includes:
> 
>   "Some updates have been proposed to the X.509 certificate documents
>    produced by the PKIX Working Group and the electronic mail security
>    documents produced by the S/MIME Working Group.
> 
>    The LAMPS (Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME) Working
>    Group is chartered to make updates where there is a known constituency
>    interested in real deployment and there is at least one sufficiently
>    well specified approach to the update so that the working group can
>    sensibly evaluate whether to adopt a proposal."
> 
> but the last paragraph says:
> 
>    "In addition, the LAMPS WG may investigate other updates to documents
>    produced by the PKIX and S/MIME WGs, but the LAMPS WG shall not adopt
>    any of these potential work items without rechartering."
> 
> so I guess despite the weasel room at the beginning, it has to add
> a #. point for RFC7030.  We have also discussed doing a light CMP profile.
> 
> Maybe a single point could say something about updates to Certificate
> Enrollment protocols, include EST and CMP.
> 
> In the meantime, I need help evaluating the comments in
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid4384
> 
> I simply don't have the ASN.1-fu to understand &Type.
> 
> }Section 4.5.2 says:
> }CsrAttrs ::= SEQUENCE SIZE (0..MAX) OF AttrOrOID
> }
> }AttrOrOID ::= CHOICE (oid OBJECT IDENTIFIER, attribute Attribute }
> }
> }Attribute { ATTRIBUTE:IOSet } ::= SEQUENCE {
> }     type   ATTRIBUTE.&id({IOSet}),
> }     values SET SIZE(1..MAX) OF ATTRIBUTE.&Type({IOSet}{@type}) }
> ]It should say:
> }
> }AttrOrOID ::= CHOICE {
> }      oid OBJECT IDENTIFIER,
> }      attribute Attribute{YouNeedToDefineOrReferenceAnObjectSet}
> }}
> 
> I presumed that while the ATTRIBUTE.&Type({IOSet}{@type}) was pretty much
> not understandable to me, that it was legitimate.  I didn't know exactly
> what the series of SET/SEQ it represented, but I just tweaked a bit
> and matched against the examples shown.  I wound up with:
>   Attribute = [ rfc822Name-OID, { [rfc822Name-value] } ]
> 
> []-seq
> {}-set
> 
> --
> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network architect  [
> ]     [e-mail]  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
> 
> 
> 
> 
>