W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xkms-ws@w3.org > November 2001

RE: XKMS 2.0 base working draft

From: Krishna Sankar <ksankar@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 11:11:42 -0800
To: <stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie>
Cc: <www-xkms-ws@w3c.org>
Message-ID: <NABBJDOPDKGCDCNBNEDOIEABGCAA.ksankar@cisco.com>
sf,

	Good. I also tend towards a self-contained approach. That is why I was
looking at ETSI et al. I think we would be able to achieve it, if we start
early and have discussions around that aspect. I would be happy to champion
this part of XKMS.

cheers

 | -----Original Message-----
 | From: www-xkms-ws-request@w3.org [mailto:www-xkms-ws-request@w3.org]On
 | Behalf Of Stephen Farrell
 | Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:53 AM
 | To: Krishna Sankar
 | Cc: www-xkms-ws@w3c.org
 | Subject: Re: XKMS 2.0 base working draft
 |
 |
 |
 | Krishna,
 |
 | (I was talking about the timing of the specs.)
 |
 | I guess I would tend towards the more self-contained approach -
 | something
 | like specifying use of xmldsig and xmlenc "directly" for xkms where
 | we need message level protection (and perhaps tls/ssl where we don't).
 |
 | >         As another point, my hope is that by the time we are
 | ready with our final
 | > version, SOAP security would be far enough for us to use it.
 |
 | I seem to recall Blair making a comment that made me think the
 | opposite on the conference call last week (Blair?).
 |
 | Stephen.
 |
 | --
 | ____________________________________________________________
 | Stephen Farrell
 | Baltimore Technologies,   tel: (direct line) +353 1 881 6716
 | 39 Parkgate Street,                     fax: +353 1 881 7000
 | Dublin 8.                mailto:stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie
 | Ireland                             http://www.baltimore.com
 |
 |
Received on Wednesday, 21 November 2001 14:13:36 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 13:51:41 EDT