Re: Issue with the requirements document: PKIX-centric terminology

[Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@xxxxxxxxx>]

Stephen Kent wrote:
> SPKI is not an IETF standard, and in earlier discussion on the list I 
> think we agreed to not include it.

Well, two things. I don't recall any explicit consensus to omit
spki, since we've not really got any concrete things on which we've
yet got a rough consensus (the draft charter handed to the IESG
I guess would be the first such).

Secondly, sure, spki isn't a standard, and isn't really in serious
use (afaik), but a putative WG could still agree to allocate a
tag. I think the chances of spki being seen as a serious distraction
to PKIX are pretty much zero these days, so that tag has no real
cost. Its potential benefit is really that it might raise some
technical issue that would otherwise have gone unnoticed, thus
improving TAM and PKIX and OpenPGP and all.

S.