|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
September 2009 as Internet Standard.
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
This IETF standard is referenced in ITU-T Y.oneM2M.SEC.SOL
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=5652
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
Approved in September 2009 as Internet Standard.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
IETF RFC 5652 obsoletes RFC 3852; two errata are available.
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
Not known.
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
Normative References/
[ACPROFILE] Farrell, S. and R. Housley, "An Internet Attribute Certificate Profile for Authorization", RFC 3281, April 2002./
[PROFILE] Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S., Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, May 2008./
[STDWORDS] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997./
[X.208-88] CCITT. Recommendation X.208: Specification of Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1), 1988./
[X.209-88] CCITT. Recommendation X.209: Specification of Basic Encoding Rules for Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1), 1988./
[X.501-88] CCITT. Recommendation X.501: The Directory - Models, 1988./
[X.509-88] CCITT. Recommendation X.509: The Directory - Authentication Framework, 1988./
[X.509-97] ITU-T. Recommendation X.509: The Directory - Authentication Framework, 1997./
[X.509-00] ITU-T. Recommendation X.509: The Directory - Authentication Framework, 2000./
/
13.2. Informative References/
[CMS1] Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax", RFC 2630, June 1999./
[CMS2] Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)", RFC 3369, August 2002./
[CMS3] Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)", RFC 3852, July 2004./
[CMSALG] Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) Algorithms", RFC 3370, August 2002./
[CMSMSIG] Housley, R., "Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) Multiple Signer Clarification", RFC 4853, April 2007./
[DH-X9.42] Rescorla, E., "Diffie-Hellman Key Agreement Method", RFC 2631, June 1999./
[ESS] Hoffman, P., Ed., "Enhanced Security Services for S/MIME", RFC 2634, June 1999./
[MSAC] Microsoft Development Network (MSDN) Library, "Authenticode", April 2004 Release./
[MSG2] Dusse, S., Hoffman, P., Ramsdell, B., Lundblade, L., and L. Repka, "S/MIME Version 2 Message Specification", RFC 2311, March 1998./
[MSG3] Ramsdell, B., Ed., "S/MIME Version 3 Message Specification", RFC 2633, June 1999./
[MSG3.1] Ramsdell, B., Ed., "Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 3.1 Message Specification", RFC 3851, July 2004./
[NEWPKCS#1] Kaliski, B. and J. Staddon, "PKCS #1: RSA Cryptography Specifications Version 2.0", RFC 2437, October 1998./
[OCSP] Myers, M., Ankney, R., Malpani, A., Galperin, S., and C. Adams, "X.509 Internet Public Key Infrastructure Online Certificate Status Protocol - OCSP", RFC 2560, June 1999./
[PKCS#1] Kaliski, B., "PKCS #1: RSA Encryption Version 1.5", RFC 2313, March 1998./
[PKCS#6] RSA Laboratories. PKCS #6: Extended-Certificate Syntax Standard, Version 1.5. November 1993./
[PKCS#7] Kaliski, B., "PKCS #7: Cryptographic Message Syntax Version 1.5", RFC 2315, March 1998./
[PKCS#9] RSA Laboratories. PKCS #9: Selected Attribute Types, Version 1.1. November 1993./
[PWRI] Gutmann, P., "Password-based Encryption for CMS", RFC 3211, December 2001./
[RANDOM] Eastlake, D., 3rd, Schiller, J., and S. Crocker, "Randomness Requirements for Security", BCP 106, RFC 4086, June 2005.
|
|
9.
|
Qualification of
ISOC/IETF:
|
|
|
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
|
10.
|
Other (for any supplementary information):
|
|
|
None.
|
|
