[cabfcert_policy] Review Framework for Next Tuesday

[Dean Coclin]

Thanks everyone that joined today’s call. Sorry about canceling the face to
face meeting but believe me, you didn’t want to be in Boston today. The snow
is still coming down, albeit lighter than earlier, and it’s very cold.

 

Thanks to Ben, I think we made good progress by reviewing section 5. If we
can do the same on the section 6(?) on the next call, we could then present
the formatting and those sections to the forum for approval. 

 

Regarding a rescheduling of the meeting, Robin mentioned that he will be in
the states the week of Feb 23rd.  But then I realized that our CABF F2F is
only 2 weeks after that. Perhaps we should plan for a 3 hour meeting on
Tuesday March 10th in Cupertino.  Thoughts?

Dean

 

From: policyreview-bounces at cabforum.org
[mailto:policyreview-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Ben Wilson
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 12:10 AM
To: i-barreira at izenpe.net; policyreview at cabforum.org
Subject: Re: [cabfcert_policy] Review Framework for Next Tuesday

 

Here are different tables sorted by either RFC3647, ETSI or WebTrust.  I
didn’t have time to merge in all of ETSI and WebTrust, so that is why some
of those cells are empty (which is also why I sent the Excel spreadsheets in
my previous email).

 

From: policyreview-bounces at cabforum.org
[mailto:policyreview-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Ben Wilson
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 5:29 PM
To: i-barreira at izenpe.net; policyreview at cabforum.org
Subject: Re: [cabfcert_policy] Review Framework for Next Tuesday

 

I wasn’t able to fill in as much as I’d have liked to.  Here is the raw
data.  I’ll also prepare a comparison/mapping chart in Word/PDF for
everyone’s reference. 

 

From: i-barreira at izenpe.net [mailto:i-barreira at izenpe.net] 
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 1:15 AM
To: Ben Wilson; policyreview at cabforum.org
Subject: RE: [cabfcert_policy] Review Framework for Next Tuesday

 

Ben,

 

The ETSI EN 319 401 is a generic document for all type of TSPs but not all
TSPs issue certificates, for that, you can also have the EN 319 411-1 which
has some “answers” to those “empty” cells.

When you have your task ready I can complete with the 411.

Check this checklist. It´s not finished (the last tab with the comparison
with the CABF docs needs to be updated) but you can see where there´s a mix
of use of the 401 and 411.

 

Regards

 

 

Iñigo Barreira
Responsable del Área técnica
 <mailto:i-barreira at izenpe.net> i-barreira at izenpe.net

945067705

 

Descripción: cid:image001.png at 01CE3152.B4804EB0

ERNE! Baliteke mezu honen zatiren bat edo mezu osoa legez babestuta egotea.
Mezua badu bere hartzailea. Okerreko helbidera heldu bada (helbidea gaizki
idatzi, transmisioak huts egin) eman abisu igorleari, korreo honi erantzuna.
KONTUZ!
ATENCION! Este mensaje contiene informacion privilegiada o confidencial a la
que solo tiene derecho a acceder el destinatario. Si usted lo recibe por
error le agradeceriamos que no hiciera uso de la informacion y que se
pusiese en contacto con el remitente.

 

De: policyreview-bounces at cabforum.org
[mailto:policyreview-bounces at cabforum.org] En nombre de Ben Wilson
Enviado el: sábado, 24 de enero de 2015 17:13
Para: policyreview at cabforum.org
Asunto: Re: [cabfcert_policy] Review Framework for Next Tuesday

 

I’m updating this document today,  so if you’re reviewing it today or
tomorrow, let me know and I’ll send you a current version.  Otherwise, I’ll
send everyone the updated version tomorrow afternoon, Mountain Time.

 

From: policyreview-bounces at cabforum.org
[mailto:policyreview-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Ben Wilson
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 10:44 PM
To: policyreview at cabforum.org
Subject: [cabfcert_policy] Review Framework for Next Tuesday

 

Here is the template that I’m using for next week.  I still have to populate
NIST provisions into the cells on the left and more CABF Network Security
provisions into cells on the right.  The basis for the ETSI provisions was
EN 319-401.  I’ll see if I’ve missed anything for ETSI and pull those
provisions in.  And, if I get time to put the WebTrust criteria into a
similar set of columns, I will.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://cabforum.org/pipermail/policyreview/attachments/20150127/f95641e5/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 19121 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://cabforum.org/pipermail/policyreview/attachments/20150127/f95641e5/attachment-0001.png 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6130 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://cabforum.org/pipermail/policyreview/attachments/20150127/f95641e5/attachment-0001.bin