RE: Further SACRED requirements comments

[Al Arsenault <aarsenault@xxxxxxxxx>]

John,


-----Original Message-----
From:	Linn, John [SMTP:jlinn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:	Tuesday, January 09, 2001 8:39 AM
To:	'Al Arsenault'; 'ietf-sacred@xxxxxxx'
Subject:	RE: Further SACRED requirements comments

Al, all, re:

>
> In the requirements document, #F4 might usefully be restated "The details
> of the actual credential type or format MUST be opaque to the protocol,
> though not to processing within the protocol's peers. The protocol MUST
> NOT depend on the internal structure of any credential type or format."
> >
>
> AWA:  Okay, I'm not exactly sure what you mean by the new
> clause "...though
> not to processing within the protocol's peers..."  Is your
> intent to convey
> that the entities that execute the SCACRE protocol in
> question might also
> be expected to process the credential at some point, or is
> there some other
> point that I'm missing?

I was trying to draw out the point that, while a credential format may be
opaque to the protocol per se, it still needs to be recognized and 
processed
within the end entities.  This may be stating the obvious, but (mindful 
also
of some discussion at the San Diego session about distinctions between
SACRED protocol requirements vs. end-entity requirements), I thought it
might be a clarifying point to add here.

AWA:  I agree with you then, and we'll change the wording.  (Darn, I regret 
missing the San Diego meeting - sounds like the discussions were pretty 
productive. Okay, the beer in Munich was certainly substantially better, 
but other than that...)

		Al Arsenault