>From: Ned Freed <NED(_at_)INNOSOFT(_dot_)COM>
>Subject: Re: X.509 v3 support
>Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 09:48:44 -0800 (PST)
>I agree with Bob on all of this. I also think that the only way to deal
>with these matters is to review the v3 cert work carefully, develop a
>list of potential issues, and then try to write a document that deals
>with them. Informed decisions on what to push for can be made once this is
>done.
>
>I also think this should be a topic for a new group. (The mailing list
>used doesn't matter to me.)
I do not agree with Bob on this.
Justification: v3 means no change to older (conformant) PEM system, and
interworking
at the v1 service is assured between systems. v1 (or default to
be precise)
PEM procedures may continue to be used with v3 certificates.
I do not thing this should be a topic for a new group: the topic is
(a) as v3 relates to PEM, already fully covered in the proposed std
(b) fully within the PEM WG charter.
If there are new work items, to address non-v1 uses of v3, or to upgrade
PEM procedures to use the std extensions, he can petition the chair,
as I did.
We have received appeals and comment to be a more disciplined and
productive WG. lets start with the basic model of respecting the
chair's role when it comes to the agenda and procedure.