Subject: WGLC for draft-ietf-pkix-ta-format-02

From: Stefan Santesson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 15:58:17 +0200

The authors of the TA format specification has asked for a WGLC on the
current document:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pkix-ta-format-02

This last call will run for 2 weeks and ends on Monday, May 18.

---

From: Stefan Santesson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 15:12:13 +0200

At the meeting in San Francisco I pointed to the ETSI TSL standard as
something we at least should take a look at as it partly covers the same
area as the ta-format document.

Both these standards has the capacity to provide a signed list of trust
anchors accompanied by relevant parameters and trust data.
The TLS standards (ETSI 102 231) covers a lot of stuff that is not relevant
for a ta-format standard, but there is one thing we may want to consider.

The TSL file has some overall data for the whole list such as:

* Version identifier
* Issuer 
* issue date and time
* Next update

This might also be useful data in a TrustAnchorList.
If the TA list represent the ³current² compiled list of trust anchors for a
system or environment, then it could be useful to know when that list was
issued, and optionally, when a new list will be available.

A version identifier is often a good protocol design feature.
The issuer might be redundant, but could be useful to locate the signer¹s
certificate.

To some extent this could be overlapped by the CMS wrapper, but there could
be  a point carrying the data in the actual TA list if the CMS wrapper is
stripped off after signature verification.

Note: I¹m not proposing this at this time. I just want the PKIX list to
consider this. My mind is not made up yet.

/Stefan

As part of the WGLC I would like the WG to consider adding more overall
metadata to  

On 09-05-04 3:58 PM, "Stefan Santesson" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> The authors of the TA format specification has asked for a WGLC on the current
> document:

---

From: "Denis Pinkas"<[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 15:26:17 +0200

Stefan,

See my comments in-line.

----- Message reçu ----- 
De : owner-ietf-pkix 
À : Stefan Santesson,pkix 
Date : 2009-05-05, 15:12:13
Sujet : Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-pkix-ta-format-02

At the meeting in San Francisco I pointed to the ETSI TSL standard as something we at least should take a look at as it partly covers the same area as the ta-format document.

IMO, the ETSI TSL does not cover the same topic, even partly. 
The ETSI TSL is based on a pull model, where TAM is based on a push model.
Their goals are different.

(...)

Note: I’m not proposing this at this time. I just want the PKIX list to consider this. My mind is not made up yet.

Denis
/Stefan

As part of the WGLC I would like the WG to consider adding more overall metadata to  

The authors of the TA format specification has asked for a WGLC on the current document:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pkix-ta-format-02

---

From: Stefan Santesson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 15:31:11 +0200

Denis,

The TA-Format document is not just used for TAM. The TA-Format document was
broken out from TAM so that it could serve any environment or model that
need to represent a signed list of TAs.

/Stefan

On 09-05-05 3:26 PM, "Denis Pinkas" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Stefan,
>  
> See my comments in-line.
>  
>>  
>> -----  Message reçu -----
>>  
>> De  : owner-ietf-pkix <mailto :[email-masked]>
>>  
>> À  : Stefan  Santesson,pkix <mailto :[email-masked],[email-masked]>
>>  
> something we at least should take a look at as it partly covers the same area
> as the ta-format document.
>

---

From: Russ Housley <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 May 2009 09:42:07 -0400

Remember how we got here!  The TAMP document included a trust anchor
format, and it was suggested that the format be extracted so that other
protocols might be able to take advantage of them.  These fields
seem to be related to a protocol environment.  I do not think they
should be included in the draft-ietf-pkix-ta-format document.

Russ

At 09:12 AM 5/5/2009, Stefan Santesson wrote:

The TSL
file has some overall data for the whole list such as:

Version identifier

Issuer

issue date and time

Next update