W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > April 2011

Re: self-signed

From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 23:19:04 +0200
Cc: "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
Message-Id: <AD02E645-0DBC-4DE9-8256-9FEECFC5612B@bblfish.net>
To: "Mo McRoberts" <Mo.McRoberts@bbc.co.uk>

On 18 Apr 2011, at 23:07, Mo McRoberts wrote:

> 
> On 18 Apr 2011, at 21:52, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> 
> >> A good idea, but let's speak numbers.
> >>
> >> How many certs with e-mail addresess as you published are there really?
> >> Of those how many are client certs? How many of those have mailto uris that are backed by webfinger?
> >
> > Please re-read the sentences above.
> >
> > This has nothing to do with Webfinger bar the fact that it solves the bigger issue of making a "mailto:" scheme URI a de-referencable URI. That's it.
> 
> Let's phrase it another way:
> 
> How many certificates which are potentially WebID certs (that is, have some kind of identifier which COULD be resolved if the server knew how) are actually out there?
> 
> We already know SSL client certificates pretty much failed. It doesn't matter how many GMail e-mail addresses are out there if they don't already have certificates, because brand new certs which conform in whatever way the WebID coin lands can be generated.
> 
> I can't help but wonder if there is some cross-purpose arguing going on.
> 
> You're saying “WebID should support more than just http URIs”
> 
> Peter, on the other hand, is saying “WebID should work with X.509v1 certificates, ignore critical extension, basically work with whatever certificates are *already out there* [even though we know that none of them are actually WebID certs!]”
> 
> Henry's saying “WebID should be built on X.509v3 with the URI in the SAN [or possibly IAN?], but for the moment let's focus on HTTP[s] URIs in building the testsuite, then move onto other schemes”
> 
> Is that a fair summary?
> 
> Kingsley, Henry isn't — I don't think — actually disagreeing with you, it's just a matter of prioritising the initial work.
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong.
> 

Fair summary. Thanks. Let's agree that we all agree. :-)

> 
> --
> Mo McRoberts - Data Analyst - Digital Public Space,
> Zone 1.08, BBC Scotland, 40 Pacific Quay, Glasgow G51 1DA,
> Room 7066, BBC Television Centre, London W12 7RJ,
> 0141 422 6036 (Internal: 01-26036) - PGP key 0x663E2B4A
> 
>  
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk
> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
> If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
> Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
> Further communication will signify your consent to this.

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/
Received on Monday, 18 April 2011 21:19:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:06:24 UTC