AW: Notary services requirements -- directions?

["Michael Tielemann" <michael.tielemann@xxxxxxxx>]

That's it.  A technical standard should be open for different scenarios.
It's up to the standard to provide a common basis for implementing
applications on top of it. We should understand the wg group results as
a vehicle for any technical approach, e.g #1   I guess the
recommandation "Long-term Data Validation Protocol" is a good one.

-Michael Tielemann


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: owner-ietf-ltans@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-ietf-ltans@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Arshad Noor
> Gesendet: Samstag, 16. Oktober 2004 06:18
> An: 'ietf-ltans@xxxxxxx'
> Betreff: Re: Notary services requirements -- directions?
> 
> 
> 
> Seems to me, the list is struggling with two different issues:
> 
> 1) the protocols and standards associated with verifying the
>     authenticity of a document over very long periods; and
> 
> 2) the potential use of such technology to maintain the legal
>     validity of documents that were presumably electronically
>     notarized by human notaries.
> 
> I believe it is possible for the WG to achieve #1 without 
> being concerned about #2.  If specific business groups 
> (Notaries) wish to create legal bindings around the technical 
> protocols, so be it. The technical standards should support 
> that outcome without being concerned about what human 
> notaries do - value-added integrators, software & hardware 
> vendors will worry about that using the standards & protocols 
> established by this WG.
> 
> Since legitimate businesses - even outside the notarial areas 
> - will have use for such technology, it behooves this group 
> to maintain focus on #1 without being concerned about #2.
> 
> I would recommend the use of something along the lines of 
> "Long-term Data Validation Protocol" to remain industry-neutral.
> 
> Arshad Noor
> StrongAuth, Inc.
> 
> Richard Hansberger wrote:
> > Respectfully, I'll disagree with the determination that "notary 
> > service" is an appropriate term. Here in the states, we 
> went through a 
> > similar debate when major CAs and others offered "digital notary 
> > services" in the wake of passage of the Federal "E-Sign" Act. 
> > Personally, I think it had a detrimental effect overall and 
> all these 
> > "services" have since closed up shop or been renamed, but 
> that's just 
> > my opinion.
> > 
> > What Notaries do, in other words, has little to do with the 
> > certification that a document is a true and original copy. Notaries 
> > witness signings, take oaths and affirmations, and perform other 
> > in-person kinds of functions. I guess I'm just sensitive to the 
> > appropriation of the word as an adjective. Notary is a noun;-)
> > 
> > Regardless, if the majority feels it is appropriate then 
> I'll oblige 
> > and say no more.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Richard J. Hansberger
> > Director of eNotarization
> > National Notary Association
> > 818-739-4027
> > 
> 
> 
>