Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509)
charter-ietf-pkix-04

Document Charter Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509) WG (pkix)
Title Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509)
Last updated 1995-10-26
State Approved
WG State Concluded
IESG Responsible AD Sean Turner
Charter Edit AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

Charter
charter-ietf-pkix-04

The PKIX Working Group was established in the fall of 1995 with the
  goal of developing Internet standards to support X.509-based Public
  Key Infrastructures (PKIs). Initially PKIX pursued this goal by
  profiling X.509 standards developed by the CCITT (later the ITU-T).
  Later, PKIX initiated the development of standards that are not
  profiles of ITU-T work, but rather are independent initiatives
  designed to address X.509-based PKI needs in the Internet. Over time
  this latter category of work has become the major focus of PKIX work,
  i.e., most PKIX-generated RFCs are no longer profiles of ITU-T X.509
  documents.

  PKIX has produced a number of standards track and informational RFCs.
  RFC 3280 (Certificate and CRL Profile), and RCF 3281 (Attribute
  Certificate Profile) are recent examples of standards track RFCs that
  profile ITU-T documents. RFC 2560 (Online Certificate Status
  Profile), RFC 3779 (IP Address and AS Number Extensions), and RFC
  3161 (Time Stamp Authority) are examples of standards track RFCs that
  are IETF-initiated. RFC 4055 (RSA) and RFC 3874 (SHA2) are examples
  of informational RFCs that describe how to use public key and hash
  algorithms in PKIs.

  PKIX Work Plan

  PKIX will continue to track the evolution of ITU-T X.509 documents,
  and will maintain compatibility between these documents and IETF PKI
  standards, since the profiling of X.509 standards for use in the
  Internet remains an important topic for the working group.

  PKIX does not endorse the use of specific cryptographic algorithms
  with its protocols. However, PKIX does publish standards track RFCs
  that describe how to identify algorithms and represent associated
  parameters in these protocols, and how to use these algorithms with
  these protocols. We anticipate efforts in this arena will continue to
  be required over time.

  PKIX will pursue new work items in the PKI arena if working group
  members express sufficient interest, and if approved by the cognizant
  Security Area director. For example, certificate validation under X.
  509 and PKIX standards calls for a relying party to use a trust
  anchor as the start of a certificate path. Neither X.509 nor extant
  PKIX standards define protocols for the management of trust anchors.
  Existing mechanisms for managing trust anchors, e.g., in browsers,
  are limited in functionality and non-standard. There is considerable
  interest in the PKI community to define a standard model for trust
  anchor management, and standard protocols to allow remote management.
  Thus a future work item for PKIX is the definition of such protocols
  and associated data models.