Subject: [saag] Fwd: [pkix] Is it time for a pkix extensions (or similar) wg?

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 11:58:53 +0000

FYI, please respond on the pkix list [1] if you've
things to say,
Thanks,
S.

[1] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [pkix] Is it time for a pkix extensions (or similar) wg?
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 11:56:29 +0000
From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
To: pkix <[email-masked]>

Hiya,

We seem to be seeing a number of drafts that folks are
writing that define new certificate extensions or that
want to update/modify PKIX specs.

Do folks think it is now time to form a working group
to process those?

If no, please say why.

If yes, please say what draft(s) and propose any other
scoping. If you know of people who are or would implement
and deploy, that is very useful information. (It is fine
to say "I think we should work on topic <foo>" but it is
*much* better if you can point at a draft you've written
about <foo> and say that you or someone is implementing
that and that it'll get deployed.)

If you think this requires face to face discussion at
IETF95 (e.g. to tease out scope) please say that too.
We still have a couple of weeks before the BoF deadline
and if a short session is needed that can be arranged.
Note though that there is no need to have such a BoF
session to form a WG, if everything is clear already.

FWIW, my impression is that we do seem to have a handful
of drafts where folks seem willing to do the work and
where the work might be (or has been) implemented. So
if there's enough interest, I'd be supportive of forming
a (hopefully:-) short-lived, tightly scoped, WG to handle
that work.

Cheers,
S.

_______________________________________________
pkix mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix