Peter SA replied: > On 8/23/12 1:28 PM, Hodges, Jeff wrote: >> Peter SA replied: >>> On 8/22/12 10:23 PM, Hill, Brad wrote:
<snippage/> >>>> >>>> d) Does that work depend on or build directly from the HTTPS >>>> work, or are there other WGs where it can be undertaken on its >>>> own timeline and where the "right people" are already >>>> assembled? >>> >>> I think some of the work for other application technologies is >>> parallel to the HTTPS work, and some of it is downstream. We'll >>> need to get down to cases and see exactly what work applies more >>> generally and what work is specific to particular technologies. >> >> Given that just doing this work for HTTPS will be tough, > > True. You saw how long it took us to produce RFC 6125... Indeed. >> I'm for keeping the charter narrowly focused on HTTPS PKI for now, >> coming up with some initial drafts, and then as they firm up, >> shopping them around to the other app technology communities (aka >> working groups) to see if they have interest in doing the same for >> their areas of interest, and then consider re-chartering. > > Perchance. I somewhat doubt that every community will have the energy > to work on dedicated documents of a descriptive nature (and some of > those communities no longer have WGs at the IETF), but I do think that > if someone writes a more general descriptive (or, eventually, > prescriptive) document or set of documents then we would be able to > get feedback from those different communities (much as we did while > working on RFC 6125). agreed. > So for now I will mostly go along with what > you've just proposed, with the proviso that I'll keep an eye on the > work here (and encourage folks from other technology communities to do > the same) so we can see where input from outside of HTTPS would be > important. sounds good. thanks, =JeffH _______________________________________________ wpkops mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wpkops
