W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > April to June 2001

Re: additional XMLDSIG URIs

From: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 23:02:47 -0400
Message-Id: <200104200302.XAA0000063351@torque.pothole.com>
To: <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>, <lde008@dma.isg.mot.com>

From:  "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
Message-Id:  <4.3.2.7.2.20010417180425.032f4430@localhost>
Date:  Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:15:10 -0400
To:  "Brian LaMacchia" <bal@microsoft.com>
Cc:  "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <dee3@torque.pothole.com>,
            <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>, <lde008@dms.isg.mot.com>
In-Reply-To:  <BCDB2C3F59F5744EBE37C715D66E779CEAB65F@red-msg-04.redmond.
	      corp.microsoft.com>

>At 14:11 4/17/2001 -0700, Brian LaMacchia wrote:
>>1) Why did you choose to use URLs that were not of the form
>>"http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#<something>", where the something is
>>sha256, sha284, etc.  Ideally these should probably be NIST-defined
>>identifiers, and failing that I would have expected them to follow the
>>XMLDSIG naming scheme.
>
>Good question. The simple bit is since they aren't defined by the dsig 
>namespace (and the resource you get back when you resolve that URI) they 
>shouldn't be in that namespace by W3C policy. Once we reach REC (hopefully 
>very soon) our namespace and its meaning is frozen (and we don't want to 
>delay/recycle specifying/debugging/waiting-for-implementation on these 
>algorithms).
>
>This document could also/alternatively be published as a W3C Note using 
>different namespace such as:
>        http://www.w3.org/2001/05/xmldsig-extension#
>(and again, the W3C would require that this namespace resolve to something, 
>most probably the W3C Note, but that's easy on the W3C side). I'm curious 
>what people think about using *.arpa domain (from the ietf-draft [1]) that 
>doesn't resolve for these informational/non-normative identifiers.
>
>[1] ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-eastlake-uri-fqdn-param-00.txt

That they are *.ietf.arpa domains and that they don't currently and
might never resolve are two completely different questions.

>As an aside, and directly to Don's draft, if folks want to go the *.arpa 
>route, I find using the host to identify the type of algorithm as an 
>additional complexity in namespace parsing/recognition.

I think you are right and am dropping that, shortening the domain
names by one label.

>__
>Joseph Reagle Jr.                 http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
>W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
>IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/Signature
>W3C XML Encryption Chair          http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/

Thanks,
Donald
Received on Thursday, 19 April 2001 23:03:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:13 GMT