[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Charter Modification

2004-09-07 10:20:56

I guess I didn't see this as a big change. I'm also not sure anybody was really suggesting a more dynamic approach just that red flags might be raised by PKIX if we assume we're going to stick it in a cert.  I personally don't think PKIX is going to care because PKIX is tring to close down.  And, I think there's only a couple of "simple" ways to distribute the attribute: in a respository or in a cert.  The repository case is already defined we're just doing the other one.  Besides, you don't have to implement it if you don't want to.


Stefan Santesson wrote:

This text sounds as it implies a substantial expansion of scope of the capabilities issue.


I don’t oppose this change but suggest then that we change ”a specification will be developed“ to “specifications will be developed”.


The type of complex approaches recently discussed on this list to accommodate dynamic assertion of sMIMECapabilities doesn’t mix very well with the simple and direct task to document the use of the existing attribute structure as a certificate extension.


I therefore strongly suggest, in case the WG wants to pursue that path, that the recent discussed expanded task is separated into its own work item and that the WG assigns another editor for that work.

I don’t have the time and capacity to edit that specification.

Stefan Santesson
Microsoft Security Center of Excellence (SCOE)

From: owner-ietf-smime(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org [mailto:owner-ietf-smime(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Sean P. Turner
Sent: den 7 september 2004 13:12
Subject: Re: Charter Modification


I'm going to forward the charter on to Russ with Tony's suggested changes.   As for the other issue of S/MIME gateways, we'll see how it plays out in the other working group.

Sean P. Turner wrote:


To include Stefan's work in the working group we need to modify the working group's charter (we also needed to update the dates anyway because some are way off).  Attached is the proposed modification.  Please respond with any comments by  Friday.




S/MIME Mail Security (smime)
     Sean Turner <turners(_at_)ieca(_dot_)com>
     Blake Ramsdell <blake(_at_)sendmail(_dot_)com>
Security Area Director:
     Russ Housley <housley(_at_)vigilsec(_dot_)com>
     Steve Belovin <smb(_at_)research(_dot_)att(_dot_)com>
Security Area Advisor:
     Russ Housley <housley(_at_)vigilsec(_dot_)com>
Mailing Lists:
     General Discussion: ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
     To Subscribe:       ietf-smime-request(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Description of Working Group:
The S/MIME Working Group has completed a series of Proposed Standards that comprise the S/MIME version 3.1 specification. As part of the specification update, a new suite of "mandatory to implement" algorithms was be selected. Current efforts update and build upon these base specifications.
The Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) (RFC 3852) is cryptographic algorithm independent, yet there is always more than one way to use any algorithm. To ensure interoperability, each algorithm should have a specification that describes its use with CMS. Specifications for the use of additional cryptographic algorithms will be developed.
To aid implementers, documents containing example output for CMS will be collected and published. Some of the examples will include structures and signed attributes defined in the Enhanced SecurityServices (ESS) (RFC 2634) document.
CMS, as well as S/MIME version 3 and later, permit the use of previously distributed symmetric key-encryption keys. Specifications for the distribution of symmetric key-encryption keys to multiple message recipients will be developed. Mail List Agents (MLAs) areone user of symmetric key-encryption keys. The specification will be algorithm independent.

Stike the following

To aid initial determination of recipient's cryptographic capabilities a specification will be developed allowing S/MIME capabilities to be stored and asserted in X.509 certificates based on the X.509 certificate and CRL profile developed by the PKIX Working Group.

And replace it with:

To aid initial determination of a recipient's cryptographic and other S/MIME related capabilities, a specification will be developed allowing these capabilities to be distributed using method(s) in addition to that currently specified

The working group will perform necessary interoperability testing to rogress the CMS and S/MIME specifications to Draft Standard. The CMS specification depends on the RFC 3280. This profile must progress to Draft Standard before CMS and the other S/MIME specifications can progress to Draft Standard. Assuming timely progress by the PKIX Working Group, the S/MIME specification can start progressing to Draft Standard in 2005.
     Submit CMS compressed data content type a Proposed Standard.
     Submit security label usage specification as Informational RFC.
     Submit elliptic curve algorithm specification as Informational RFC.
     Submit update to CMS as a Proposed Standard.
     Submit CMS Algorithms as a Proposed Standard.
     Submit AES key wrap algorithm description as Informational RFC.
     Last call on X.400 CMS wrapper specification.
     Last call on X.400 transport specification.
     Last call on HMAC key wrap description specification.
     Last call on RSA OAEP algorithm specification.
     Last call on AES algorithm specification.
     Last call on update to MSG.
     First draft of update to CERT.
     First draft of CMS and ESS examples document.
     First draft of S/MIME version 3.1 interoperability matrix.
     First draft of RSA PSS algorithm specification.
     Submit mail list key distribution as a Proposed Standard.
     Submit HMAC key wrap description as Proposed Standard.
     Submit RSA OAEP algorithm specification as a Proposed Standard.
     Sumbit AES algorithm specification as Proposed Standard.
     Submit X.400 CMS wrapper specification as a Proposed Standard.
     Submit X.400 transport as a Proposed Standard.
     Last call on CMS and ESS examples document.
     Sumbit update to CERT as Proposed Standard.
     Sumbit update to MSG as Proposed Standard.
     First draft of RSA KEM algorithm specification.
     Last call on RSA PSS algorithm specification.
     Submit RSA PSS algorithm specification as Proposed Standard
September 04
     Submit CMS and ESS examples document as Informational RFC
     First draft of S/MIME Capabilities Certificate Extension
October 04
     Working Group Last Call for S/MIME Capabilities Certificate Extension
December 04
     Submit S/MIME Capabilities Certificate Extension as Informational RFC
January 05
     Final S/MIME version 3.1 interoperability matrix 
February 05
     Request advancement of CMS Algorithms to Draft Standard
     Request advancement of CMS to Draft Standard
     Request advancement of ESS to Draft Standard
     Request advancement of CERT to Draft Standard
     Request advancement of MSG to Draft Standard
     Last call on RSA KEM algorithm specification
January 06
     Submit RSA KEM algorithm specification as Proposed Standard
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>