Subject: [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-wallace-ta-mgmt-problem-statement-01.txt]

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 13:28:28 -0700

Of possible interest to the DKIM community:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-wallace-ta-mgmt-problem-statement-01.txt
Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 16:15:02 -0400
From: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.

	Title		: Trust Anchor Management Problem Statement
	Author(s)	: R. Reddy, C. Wallace
	Filename	: draft-wallace-ta-mgmt-problem-statement-01.txt
	Pages		: 14
	Date		: 2007-7-8
	
This document provides a problem statement for the Trust Anchor
    Management Birds of a Feather (BOF).  Trust anchors are public keys
    and associated information that are directly trusted by an
    application or system to validate digital signatures, including
    signatures covering other public keys.  At present, there exists no
    standard mechanism for distributing and managing trust anchors.  This
    document describes some of the problems associated with the lack of a
    standard trust anchor management mechanism as well as problems that
    must be addressed by such a mechanism.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wallace-ta-mgmt-problem-statement-01.txt

-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2007 14:08:59 -0700

So, as someone very interested in the trust anchor work, I don't want 
to discourage anyone here from following it, but I think it is 
completely unrelated to DKIM. DKIM, of course, doesn't need trust 
anchors, and the TAM work is all about trust anchors. (Well, there is 
some crossover because one of the DKIM co-chairs is co-chairing the 
TAM BoF in Chicago, but that's about it.)

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Domain Assurance Council
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

---

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 22:12:41 +0100

> Of possible interest to the DKIM community:

To the community, quite possibly. But I don't see much
to do with the DKIM protocol, as currently spec'd. If,
however, someone started using X.509 certs, XKMS or
DNSSEC to support DKIM, then yes, it'd start to be
relevant. Or am I missing something?

S.

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 15:00:04 -0700

> relevant. Or am I missing something?

Well, between your note and Paul's I'm now sorry I passed the anchor 
announcement on, even though I did only say "of possible interest".

It is interesting, nonetheless, that the latter part of your message provides 
some perfectly reasonable examples of why the anchor work might be "of 
interest" to DKIM folk...

Other possibilities might have to do with what domain names might sign what 
messages or even what DKIM signatures might sign existing DKIM signatures, or...

"of possible interest" wasn't meant to be specific but merely to suggest and 
area of consideration.

For individuals, not the working group.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker