[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [security-services] Errata in ManageNameIDRequest text
> I remember at least one discussion where we agreed that the > format/qualifier should be immutable once established, but I don't > remember the arguments. In practice, I don't think it's that limiting > and it could certainly simplify implementations. I specifically recall is a FtF in which I said that I wasn't sure at that point whether the proposal I had put together would be amenable to that kind of flexibility, so I took an AI to examine the issue and see if restrictions were needed. When I did, I didn't see any particular reason (from a technical standpoint) to preclude it, but somewhere the bits got mixed up in execution. I agree it's probably not that limiting. I have no idea whether it simplifies things much. My intuition would be that Format is pretty irrelevant, but that not having to deal with NameQualifiers changing might be less confusing (I'd have preferred outlawing them for the old formats anyway, they cause major interop headaches as the feds have discovered). Anyway, my main beef is the NewEncryptedID thing is confusing like this and needs to spell out what the plaintext element is supposed to be. -- Scott
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]