(introduction) Re: [ietf-enroll] Charter

[Max Pritikin]

One of the primary requirements for CMC, CMP, and XKMS seems to be
transport independence. So likely any of them.

Although I feel that the enrollment doesn't need to go over the same
transport as the introduction (pre-enrollment exchange of provisioning
and credentail information). In fact I rather expect that it is better
for the enrollment to go over an independant transport. This to better
handle the likely scenarios where introduction is handled through 3rd
party provisioning services, hardware tokens, store & forward
mechanisms, etc that don't have the appropriate realtime behavior for
the actual enrollment mechanisms. (At least not if you want said
enrollment to occur without user assistance). 

	- max

On Mon, 2003-05-19 at 11:47, Alper Yegin wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> > What we don't have is a universal provisioning framework which covers a
> > variety of credential types. That said since the existing enrolment
> > protocols are transport independent, once a decision is made to for
> > example to enrol for a certificate, that we could use an existing
> > mechanism to do so.
> 
> Which  protocols are you referring to as "existing enrollment protocols"?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Alper
> 
>