Elliptic Curve-Based Certificateless Signatures for Identity-Based Encryption (ECCSI)
RFC 6507

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2015-10-14
01 (System) Notify list changed from Michael.Groves@cesg.gsi.gov.uk, tim.polk@nist.gov, draft-groves-eccsi@ietf.org to tim.polk@nist.gov
2012-08-22
01 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Ralph Droms
2012-02-02
01 Cindy Morgan State changed to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue.
2012-02-01
01 (System) RFC published
2011-11-14
01 Cindy Morgan State changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent.
2011-11-12
01 (System) IANA Action state changed to No IC from In Progress
2011-11-12
01 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress
2011-11-12
01 Cindy Morgan IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent
2011-11-12
01 Cindy Morgan IESG has approved the document
2011-11-12
01 Cindy Morgan Closed "Approve" ballot
2011-11-12
01 Cindy Morgan Approval announcement text regenerated
2011-11-12
01 Cindy Morgan Ballot writeup text changed
2011-11-12
01 Sean Turner [Ballot Position Update] Position for Sean Turner has been changed to Yes from No Objection
2011-04-05
01 Sean Turner Ballot writeup text changed
2011-04-05
01 Sean Turner Ballot writeup text changed
2011-04-05
01 Sean Turner Ballot writeup text changed
2011-03-31
01 Sean Turner [Note]: 'Tim Polk (tim.polk@nist.gov) is the shepherd.' added
2011-03-31
01 Sean Turner
State Change Notice email list has been changed to Michael.Groves@cesg.gsi.gov.uk, tim.polk@nist.gov, draft-groves-eccsi@tools.ietf.org from Michael ...
2011-03-31
01 Sean Turner [NOTE] Tim Polk (tim.polk@nist.gov) is the shepherd.
2011-03-31
01 Sean Turner Responsible AD has been changed to Sean Turner from Tim Polk
2011-03-31
01 Sean Turner Status Date has been changed to 2011-03-31 from None
2011-02-28
01 Sean Turner [Ballot comment]
2011-02-28
01 Sean Turner [Ballot Position Update] Position for Sean Turner has been changed to No Objection from Discuss
2011-02-28
01 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2011-02-28
01 (System) New version available: draft-groves-eccsi-01.txt
2011-02-03
01 Cindy Morgan Removed from agenda for telechat
2011-02-03
01 Cindy Morgan State changed to IESG Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from IESG Evaluation.
2011-02-03
01 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-02-03
01 Jari Arkko
[Ballot comment]
Ari Keränen's review noted the following:

2. Architecture

  Before verification of any Signatures, members of the user community
  are supplied ...
2011-02-03
01 Lars Eggert
[Ballot comment]
It is the job of the *AD* to check conformance to idnits for AD-sponsored documents...

INTRODUCTION, paragraph 10:
> Copyright Notice

  Boilerplate ...
2011-02-03
01 Lars Eggert
[Ballot discuss]
DISCUSS: This is from the sec-dir review:

> This document is unusual
> for the IETF, in that it defines a new cryptographic ...
2011-02-03
01 Lars Eggert [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded
2011-02-03
01 Alexey Melnikov [Ballot comment]
The "||" convention needs to be explained early in the document.

SHA-256 needs a reference.
2011-02-03
01 Gonzalo Camarillo [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-02-02
01 Adrian Farrel [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-02-02
01 Dan Romascanu [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-02-02
01 Ron Bonica [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-02-02
01 Robert Sparks [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-02-02
01 Ralph Droms [Ballot Position Update] Position for Ralph Droms has been changed to No Objection from Discuss
2011-02-02
01 Ralph Droms [Ballot discuss]
Why is this doc being published as Informational and not Standards
Track?  I'll clear as soon as the reason is explained...
2011-02-02
01 Ralph Droms [Ballot discuss]
Why is this doc being published as Informational and not Standards Track?  I'll clear as soon as the reason is explained...
2011-02-02
01 Ralph Droms [Ballot Position Update] Position for Ralph Droms has been changed to Discuss from No Objection
2011-02-02
01 Ralph Droms
[Ballot comment]
A minor suggestion - it would help avoid confusion through
interpretation of different textual descriptions in section 3 to
take out the informal description ...
2011-02-02
01 Ralph Droms [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-02-02
01 Stewart Bryant [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-02-01
01 Russ Housley
[Ballot comment]
Please consider the comments from the Gen-ART Review by Francis Dupont
  on 13-JAN-2011.  You can found the review at:

    ...
2011-02-01
01 Russ Housley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-01-31
01 Alexey Melnikov [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is an updated discuss position.  new #7 and tweaked #4.

#1) Section 3.2: Has the following text:

  Points on ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is an updated discuss position.

#1) Section 3.2: Has the following text:

  Points on E  Elliptic Curve Points MUST be ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is an updated discuss position.

#1) Section 3.2: Has the following text:

  Points on E  Elliptic Curve Points MUST be ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is a preliminary discuss (I may come up with more after I get all the way through this document).

#1) Section 3 ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot comment]
#1) Is it Identifier-Based Encryption or Identity-Based Encryption?  RFC 5091 indicates it's the latter.

#2) In section 3.2, there are ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is a preliminary discuss (I may come up with more after I get all the way through this document).

#1) Section 3 ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot comment]
#1) Is it Identifier-Based Encryption or Identity-Based Encryption?  RFC 5091 indicates it's the latter.

#2) In section 3.2, there are ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is a preliminary discuss (I may come up with more after I get all the way through this document).

#1) Section 3 ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is a preliminary discuss (I may come up with more after I get all the way through this document).

#1) Section 3 ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is a preliminary discuss (I may come up with more after I get all the way through this document).

#1) Section 3 ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot comment]
#1) Is it Identifier-Based Encryption or Identity-Based Encryption?  RFC 5091 indicates it's the latter.

#2) In section 3.2, there are ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is a preliminary discuss (I may come up with more after I get all the way through this document).

#1) Section 3 ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot comment]
#1) Is it Identifier-Based Encryption or Identity-Based Encryption?  RFC 5091 indicates it's the latter.

#2) In section 3.2, there are ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot comment]
#1) Is it Identifier-Based Encryption or Identity-Based Encryption?  RFC 5091 indicates it's the latter.

#2) In section 3.2, there are ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is a preliminary discuss (I may come up with more after I get all the way through this document).

#1) Section 3 ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is a preliminary discuss (I may come up with more after I get all the way through this document).

#1) Section 3 ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is a preliminary discuss (I may come up with more after I get all the way through this document).

#1) Section 3 ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is a preliminary discuss (I may come up with more after I get all the way through this document).

#1) Section 3 ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is a preliminary discuss (I may come up with more after I get all the way through this document).

#1) Section 3 ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is a preliminary discuss (I may come up with more after I get all the way through this document).

#1) Section 3 ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
This is a preliminary discuss (I may come up with more after I get all the way through this document).

#1) Section 3 ...
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded
2011-01-30
01 Sean Turner [Ballot comment]
Is it Identifier-Based Encryption or Identity-Based Encryption?  RFC 5091 indicates it's the latter.
2011-01-30
01 Tim Polk State changed to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead.
2011-01-30
01 Tim Polk [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Tim Polk
2011-01-30
01 Tim Polk Ballot has been issued
2011-01-30
01 Tim Polk Created "Approve" ballot
2011-01-25
01 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed. Reviewer: Jeffrey Hutzelman.
2011-01-25
01 Tim Polk Placed on agenda for telechat - 2011-02-03
2011-01-18
01 (System) State changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call.
2011-01-11
01 Amanda Baber
IANA notes that this document does not contain a standard IANA
Considerations section. After examining the draft, IANA understands
that, upon approval of this document ...
2011-01-05
01 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Jeffrey Hutzelman
2011-01-05
01 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Jeffrey Hutzelman
2011-01-05
01 Samuel Weiler Assignment of request for Last Call review by SECDIR to Kurt Zeilenga was rejected
2011-01-04
01 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Kurt Zeilenga
2011-01-04
01 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Kurt Zeilenga
2010-12-21
01 Amy Vezza Last call sent
2010-12-21
01 Amy Vezza
State changed to In Last Call from Last Call Requested.

The following Last Call Announcement was sent out:

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To ...
2010-12-21
01 Tim Polk Last Call was requested
2010-12-21
01 (System) Ballot writeup text was added
2010-12-21
01 (System) Last call text was added
2010-12-21
01 (System) Ballot approval text was added
2010-12-21
01 Tim Polk State changed to Last Call Requested from Publication Requested.
2010-12-21
01 Tim Polk Last Call text changed
2010-09-01
01 Tim Polk Draft added in state Publication Requested by Tim Polk
2010-06-29
00 (System) New version available: draft-groves-eccsi-00.txt