[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Basic Cert-2-Directory mapping question



John,

 >As I read your suggestion, you want to add an element to the DN
 >that directs the user to the appropriate directory. The new
 >element is syntactically an RDN, but semantically is something
 >different.  The resulting new-style DN appears to me to
 >semantically comparable to an LDAP URL.


I don't think the proposed "dir" attribute is semantically very different from any other naming attributes. What we're trying to do with names in certificates is to maintain the X.500 illusion that a DN uniquely identifies an entry in some global directory. But we don't have a single global directory; instead we have a collection of directories which don't talk to one another - i.e. instead of the single DN root assumed by X.500, we actually have multiple roots, one for each directory.

I think this is a debatable point. The X.500 model assumes interconnection of top level (country or international, not multinational organizations) directories via knowledge references. Adding in a dir attribute, to compensate for the lack of these TLDs, does seem to violate the semantics of X.500 naming and of operation. Your text above makes clear how this approach deviates from the original model (with good motivations), but that does change the semantics.


<snip>

Steve