Subject: Re: draft minutes

From: Denis Pinkas <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 16:21:49 +0200

Steve,

As you probably noticed I was not present at the meeting, so I cannot say 
whether the minutes are accurate or not.

I can however say that they contain an obvious error since:
Delegated Path Validation and Delegated Path Discovery Protocol Requirements
is not RFC 3371 but RFC 3379.

I read the minutes but could not find a point I mentioned before the 
meeting, nor a separate response to the e-mail that I sent on March 17 to 
Tim Polk, yourself, Russ as co-editor of RFC 3280, and the two ADs before 
the meeting.

That e-mail was mentioning several other unresponsed e-mails.
The topic was: "key usage bits 0 and 1".

I would greatly appreciate to finally obtain a response.

Regards,

Denis

> Folks,
> 
> Attached are the draft minutes from last week's PKIX meeting.  Please 
> review them and send comment to me by Wednesday, 3/26.  Also, each 
> presenter should send a copy of his slides to me.  I already have slides 
> from Riccardo, Jim, Jong-Wook, Trevor, and Stefan.
> 
> As noted in the minutes, we will conduct a straw poll, starting now, to 
> determine the sense of the WG re initiating a new work item, for the 
> trusted archive spec.  The co-chairs approved publication of this 
> document as a WG I-D, as it seems like another aspect of PKI 
> infrastructure, e.g., it makes use of our time stamp authority standard 
> and is an obvious component for NR support. However, given the limited 
> support shown at the meeting for pursuing this work, we want to revisit 
> this decision before proceeding. Please look at the document 
> (draft-ietf-pkix-tap-00.txt) and indicate whether you believe this is an 
> appropriate WG activity, or not.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Steve

---

From: Stephen Kent <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 10:58:52 -0500

At 4:21 PM +0200 4/3/03, Denis Pinkas wrote:
>Steve,
>
>As you probably noticed I was not present at the meeting, so I 
>cannot say whether the minutes are accurate or not.
>

Denis,

Thanks for the correction re the RFC #.

I have now received corrections from several folks and we are well 
past the 3/26 close of the comment period established in the message 
distributing the draft minutes.

So, attached is a PDF with the final, revised version of the minutes, 
which is being submitted to the IETF Secretariat.

Steve