Re: [Spasm] WG Review: Some PKIX and SMIME (spasm)

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Two things:

1. The IETF96 slot for this may be moving. I'll send mail when/if
that happens but please be aware of it as you plan travel. (The
draft agenda remains a draft agenda until it's a final agenda:-)

2. We got a comment that the WG name might be considered undesirable.
I don't want to debate that but since it's a "don't care" we'll
likely change the WG name. Feel free to suggest other names here in
the next day or two and Kathleen and I will pick a winner. Or if
folks don't suggest stuff, Kathleen and I will just pick something.
(We'll ensure the mailing list migrates etc. and will send a
heads-up on that as it happens.)

Cheers,
S.

On 17/06/16 17:33, The IESG wrote:
> A new IETF WG has been proposed in the Security Area. The IESG has not
> made any determination yet. The following draft charter was submitted,
> and is provided for informational purposes only. Please send your
> comments to the IESG mailing list ([e-mail]) by 2016-06-27.
> 
> Some PKIX and SMIME (spasm)
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Current status: Proposed WG
> 
> Chairs:
>   TBD
> 
> Assigned Area Director:
>   Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>
> 
> Security Area Directors:
>   Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>
>   Kathleen Moriarty <[e-mail]>
>  
> Mailing list:
>   Address: [e-mail]
>   To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm
>   Archive: https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/spasm/
> 
> Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-spasm/
> 
> 
> The PKIX and S/MIME Working Groups have been closed for some time.  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 SPASM (Some PKIX and S/MIME) 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.  The current charter encompasses updates to 
> satisfy the following needs:
> 
> 1. Specify the way to include an i18n email address as a subject
>    alternative name and an issuer alternative name.
>    draft-melnikov-spasm-eai-addresses is a proposal in this space. 
> 
> 2. Specify the way to use authenticated encryption in S/MIME. 
>    draft-schaad-rfc5751-bis is a proposal in this space.
> 
> In addition, the SPASM Working Group may investigate other updates to 
> the documents produced by the PKIX and S/MIME Working Groups, but the 
> SPASM Working Group shall not adopt any of these potential work items 
> without rechartering. No such re-chartering is envisaged until one or 
> more of the above work items have been successfully delivered to the RFC 
> editor queue. 
> 
> Milestones:
> 
> TBD
> 
>