RFC 9483: Lightweight Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) Profile
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document aims at simple, interoperable, and automated PKI management operations covering typical use cases of industrial and Internet of Things (IoT) scenarios. This is achieved by profiling the Certificate Management Protocol (CMP), the related Certificate Request Message Format (CRMF), and transfer based on HTTP or Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) in a succinct but sufficiently detailed and self-contained way. To make secure certificate management for simple scenarios and constrained devices as lightweight as possible, only the most crucial types of operations and options are specified as mandatory. More specialized or complex use cases are supported with optional features.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC9483
- Published
- November 2023
- Authors
- H. Brockhaus; D. von Oheimb; S. Fries
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- sec
- Pages
- 83
- Also known as
- —
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 9482Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) Transfer for the Certificate Management ProtocolCurrent
November 2023
- RFC 9481Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) AlgorithmsCurrent
November 2023
- RFC 9480Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) UpdatesObsoleted
November 2023
- RFC 9478Labeled IPsec Traffic Selector Support for the Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)Current
October 2023
- RFC 9493Subject Identifiers for Security Event TokensCurrent
December 2023
- RFC 9495Certification Authority Authorization (CAA) Processing for Email AddressesCurrent
October 2023
- RFC 9470OAuth 2.0 Step Up Authentication Challenge ProtocolCurrent
September 2023
- RFC 9464Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2) Configuration for Encrypted DNSCurrent
November 2023
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?