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

Re: dropping MgmtData?

From: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 14:03:34 -0400
Message-Id: <200105301803.OAA0000030210@torque.pothole.com>
To: merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>
cc: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org

Thanks for responding in the right place even though I originally
posted the message in the wrong place :-)

I've fowarded my other message, re signature portability, etc.,


From:  merlin <merlin@baltimore.ie>
To:  "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
Cc:  w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
In-reply-to:  <200105301642.MAA0000029927@torque.pothole.com> 
Date:  Wed, 30 May 2001 18:48:46 +0100
Message-Id:  <20010530174846.EB05543CA6@yog-sothoth.ie.baltimore.com>

>[ Moved over from xml-encryption@w3.org (Donald, your other post is there too) ]
>I agree with dropping it. If mgmtdata is to be used in a proprietary
>way, then better that people must define their own proprietary element
>to do the job.
>>The MgmtData element has no defined internal structure and is just
>>described as providing in-band key distribution related information
>>such as encrypted key or key agreement information. This is clearly
>>not interoperable without further definition.
>>In the XML Encryption WG, EncryptedKey and AgreementMethod elements
>>are being defined which offer interoperabile ways to do these things.
>>Given this, is there any reason to keep MgmtData in the standard? If
>>there is someone using it, it could be moved to the additional URIs
>>draft.  In any case, I believe its use should be deprecated and use of
>>the potentially interoperable methods being defined in the XML
>>Encryption WG encouraged.
>> Donald E. Eastlake 3rd                      dee3@torque.pothole.com
>> 155 Beaver Street                                +1 508-634-2066(h)
>> Milford, MA 01757 USA                            +1 508-261-5434(w)
>Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for direct,  special,  indirect 
>or consequential  damages  arising  from  alteration of  the contents of this
>message by a third party or as a result of any virus being passed on.
>In addition, certain Marketing collateral may be added from time to time to
>promote Baltimore Technologies products, services, Global e-Security or
>appearance at trade shows and conferences.
>This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by
>Baltimore MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including
>computer viruses.
>   http://www.baltimore.com
Received on Wednesday, 30 May 2001 14:04:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:35 UTC