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

AW: KeyInfo Extensibility poll

From: Gregor Karlinger <gregor.karlinger@iaik.at>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:45:48 +0100
To: "merlin" <merlin@baltimore.ie>, "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <lde008@dma.isg.mot.com>
Cc: <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NDBBIMACDKCOPBLEJCCDEEKLDAAA.gregor.karlinger@iaik.at>
Merlin,

> By allowing these XMLDSIG defined elements to be extended, we
> are restricting interoperability: What do I do with parts of an
> X509Data that I don't understand? Ignoring them is not valid,
> because they may be critical to the use of the element. Do we
> add a criticality flag? Do we fudge the issue and say that if
> a new part is critical you must define a new KeyInfo type?
> 
> Forcing modified elements to be defined under a new namespace
> solves these problems. If I don't understand the type I ignore
> it. If I do understand it, I process it. [...]

Allowing option (2) is the same mechanism at one structural level
lower, isn't it? If there is information within a X509Data element
which I do not understand, I simply ignore it. If the information
is critical, then (1) must be used to derive a new x509 data type
in a different namespace.

Regards, Gregor
---------------------------------------------------------------
DI Gregor Karlinger
mailto:gregor.karlinger@iaik.at
http://www.iaik.at
Phone +43 316 873 5541
Institute for Applied Information Processing and Communications
Austria
---------------------------------------------------------------
 
Received on Wednesday, 24 January 2001 07:42:16 GMT

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