RE: A web of directories

[Andrew Probert <AndrewP@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Comments inline

Andew Probert
Rotek Consulting   http://www.rotek.com.au
a Division of Secure Network Solutions
Tel  +61 3 9690 8877
Fax +61 3 9690 8171



> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Kurn, David [SMTP:david.kurn@compaq.com]
> Sent:	Tuesday, February 23, 1999 7:02 AM
> To:	'Bob Jueneman'; tgindin@us.ibm.com
> Cc:	ietf-pkix@imc.org
> Subject:	RE: A web of directories
> 
> Bob et al
> 
> Nice generalization.  Of course, you have just re-invented a URI (or is it
> URL), so why not in general allow the syntax:
> 
>  
> <name-of-protocol>://<ip-address-and-maybe-portno>/<stuff-interpreted-by-t
> he
> -server
> 
> as the access to the certificate lookup service.  Obvious candidates are
> ldap: http: https:
> 
> with "ldap:" probably being the default.
> 
[Andrew Probert]  The syntax needs to be broader than URI if you go down
this path i.e. to also hold reference to X.500/IP server i.e. hostname (or
IP), portnumber, tsap, ssap, psap.  
>  I have a problem with presuming any kind of default directory pointer (in
> general) because you have no idea where or who will be using your
> certificates.  As a metaphor, consider that I send you a snail-mail
> message,
> and list on the top-left of the envelope a return address like:
> 
>   123 First Street
>   Springfield
> 
	[Andrew Probert]  That's why we need global namespaces for global
electronic commerce!

> Now, as you may know, there are at least 26 instances of Springfield in
> the
> US, but since you're in Utah, you should assume it means "Springfield
> Utah"?
> Hmmm.... Bad idea.
> 
> I have no idea if there's any hope in our lifetime of affecting standards,
> but at least the discussion is interesting.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Jueneman [mailto:BJUENEMAN@novell.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 22, 1999 11:38 AM
> To: Kurn, David; tgindin@us.ibm.com
> Cc: ietf-pkix@imc.org
> Subject: A web of directories
> 
> <snip>